• Sorry, but this is absolutely a victory for democracy and what little structure our government still has. If the states were to be allowed to remove candidates from the ballot, you could kiss any chance of Democrat candidates showing up on red state ballots goodbye.

    • @SkybreakerEngineer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      614 months ago

      Except for the part where they punt to Congress as the sole arbiter of whether Trump engaged in insurrection. They absolutely know Congress won’t get off its collective ass to enforce, because it’s too broken to even pass a budget.

        • qantravon
          link
          fedilink
          English
          114 months ago

          If a person cannot hold an office, they are typically also disqualified from running for said office, for exactly that reason. What would you do if an ineligible person won the election? That would be utter chaos.

          • @jj4211@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            34 months ago

            Someone explained to me there is a procedure for an elected candidate who is ineligible actually wins the election.

            If for any reason the president cannot carry out the duties of the office, it falls to the vice president. So you’d have to just skip the president and swear in his running mate.

            It would still be utterly stupid, but surprisingly there is a process to handle the scenario.

        • @Evilcoleslaw@lemmy.world
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          24 months ago

          They can’t really sue to disqualify him in federal court because Congress hasn’t defined any process to do so. They absolutely could if they wanted though. As of right now if I’m correct the only way to disqualify someone is if they’re convicted of rebellion or insurrection under 18 U.S.C. § 2383 as it specifically lists it as part of the punishment. Or Congress could potentially disqualify someone directly by name – it wouldn’t necessarily be an illegal bill of attainder because it carries no criminal penalty.

      • That’s a problem with Congress. That doesn’t change the fact that we should not give Republicans a new route to undermine the voting process.

    • Melllvar
      link
      fedilink
      English
      384 months ago

      States have always had control over federal elections and candidate qualifications. That’s been fundamental to American federalism since the very beginning.

      It’s not like oath-breaking is the only disqualifier, and states decide those too.

    • @chetradley@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      374 months ago

      Call me old fashioned, but an outgoing president who falsely claims their challenger stole the election and incites their supporters to storm the capitol building should be barred from holding office again, Democrat or Republican.

        • @kbotc@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          24 months ago

          How would they do that? Congress can’t actually charge someone with a crime. That’s why they wrote the 14th Amendment which spelled this out.

    • @Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      144 months ago

      States remove candidates routinely. It’s their constitutional right. Except with Trump for some reason.