this post was submitted on 04 Mar 2024
0 points (NaN% liked)

News

23367 readers
2631 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Time to violently storm the Supreme Court, then. After all, they approve.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

This is a shit take. This ruling is not saying "Trump did nothing wrong", this is specifically saying "States cannot unilaterally decide to remove federal election candidates from ballots", which I completely agree with. As others have noted, it would open the doors to so much bullshit if this were allowed.

The SC could come out tomorrow and say "We're disqualifying Trump", this doesn't preclude that.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

States remove federal election candidates for eligibility reasons all the time. Trump is yet again getting special treatment.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

[citation needed]

List one federal candidate a state successfully removed (that wasn't convicted in a federal court, or died before the election.)

Edit: I see the downvotes, but I don't see a name. I thought this was a place for reasoned debate, but it's as bad as r/politics where anything regarding the orange man is concerned.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

https://ballotpedia.org/Presidential_candidates,_2020

Every state has a different number of candidates on their ballot, because every state has different requirements to be on their ballot. Is this ruling going to require every state to accept every candidate? Even those with no chance of winning? Who should decide when someone has no chance of winning? (Silly question, it's the state, of course.)

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

States are generally free to decide their own candidates for State level elections.

Federal elections are subject to Federal law and the Federal Constitution. A State just deciding someone is disqualified based on their interpretation is both unconstitutional and incredibly stupid. It was always going to SCOTUS and it was always going to be decided this way.

Me, I don't want to live in a country where ANY level of government can just decide you are guilty of something without due process. And that's what these states tried to do. The mad downvoters lack critical thinking ability and are going off emotion.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'm neither a Constitutional scholar nor a lawyer. I'll go with Marbury v Madison as who gets to decide those finer points.

And they decided 9-0.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

their own ballots

Not federal ballots.

Except a state tried here and got slapped down 9-0. Seems to me it was deemed unconstitutional by the folks that decide that sort of thing.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

deleted by creator