# SCOTUS hears the case on Trump's eligibility on February 8, 2024 **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Tags:** trump\ **Created:** [February 6, 2024, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-hears-the-case-on-trumps-eligibility-on-february-8-2024/997204 "2024-02-06T20:25:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Happy\_Fun\_Ball](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/happy_fun_ball/32/17664_2.png) [@Happy\_Fun\_Ball](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Happy_Fun_Ball)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2024, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-hears-the-case-on-trumps-eligibility-on-february-8-2024/997204/141 "2024-02-08T20:05:03Z")
This would not surprise me. I am sure Roberts will work very hard to find a unanimous decision and then Alito and Thomas will write a concurrence that also says that Trump is worthy to be our King. ---
**Author:** ![enipla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/54ee81/32.png) [@enipla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/enipla)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2024, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-hears-the-case-on-trumps-eligibility-on-february-8-2024/997204/142 "2024-02-08T20:19:21Z")
Confused… Would a 9-0 vote be for or against Colorado? ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2024, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-hears-the-case-on-trumps-eligibility-on-february-8-2024/997204/143 "2024-02-08T20:26:56Z")
Against. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2024, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-hears-the-case-on-trumps-eligibility-on-february-8-2024/997204/144 "2024-02-08T21:10:08Z")
Based off of the justices’ tone and attitude, it looks like Sotomayor may be the sole vote against Trump. Nobody else seems persuaded. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2024, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-hears-the-case-on-trumps-eligibility-on-february-8-2024/997204/145 "2024-02-08T21:19:59Z")
> [@rocking\_chair](#): > > i was amused by the fact that an insurrection must be “organised”. huh, who knew. > [@bobot](#): > > Well, this one was, anyway. That’s why everone showed up at the same place on the same morning. I mean… [![](https://media.cnn.com/api/v1/images/stellar/prod/210108211400-03-capitol-hill-extremist-flags-civil-war-jpg.jpg?q=w_1110,c_fill/f_webp) ](https://media.cnn.com/api/v1/images/stellar/prod/210108211400-03-capitol-hill-extremist-flags-civil-war-jpg.jpg?q=w_1110,c_fill/f_webp) THEY MADE T-SHIRTS. ---
**Author:** ![bobot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bobot/32/21622_2.png) [@bobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bobot)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2024, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-hears-the-case-on-trumps-eligibility-on-february-8-2024/997204/146 "2024-02-08T21:21:11Z")
Totally spontaneous. Must have been. ---
**Author:** ![TeroSunbear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/terosunbear/32/14748_2.png) [@TeroSunbear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TeroSunbear)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2024, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-hears-the-case-on-trumps-eligibility-on-february-8-2024/997204/147 "2024-02-08T21:26:41Z")
The case won’t resolve anything if it goes for Trump. The court must write something for future cases. For example, does the amendment cover the president? And they say yes, but only as organizer of the insurrection. Trump was just a cheer leader. ---
**Author:** ![Atamasama](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/atamasama/32/12961_2.png) [@Atamasama](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atamasama)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2024, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-hears-the-case-on-trumps-eligibility-on-february-8-2024/997204/148 "2024-02-08T21:31:19Z")
> [@Horatius](#): > > We need a Monty Python skit for this. Not Monty Python but this is eerily similar to what you asked for. [![](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ZSkik6EUQUc/hqdefault.jpg?sqp=-oaymwEmCOADEOgC8quKqQMa8AEB-AH-BIAC4AOKAgwIABABGHIgSCg1MA8=&rs=AOn4CLAkuowslvQawlV5MWHI36ocX4rdlw "Mr Show - Operation Hell on Earth") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSkik6EUQUc) I love Mr. Show. ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2024, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-hears-the-case-on-trumps-eligibility-on-february-8-2024/997204/149 "2024-02-08T21:55:42Z")
> [@TeroSunbear](#): > > Trump was just a cheer leader. I will say you have the same extremely tenuous grasp of the relevant facts as Trump’s lawyers. So you got that going for you. ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2024, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-hears-the-case-on-trumps-eligibility-on-february-8-2024/997204/150 "2024-02-08T22:17:31Z")
Moderating: > [@Hamlet](#): > > I will say you have the same extremely tenuous grasp of the relevant facts as Trump’s lawyers. So you got that going for you. You’re attacking the poster, not refuting what was asserted. This isn’t allowed, and you’ve been warned about doing it before. This is another warning for attacking the poster and not the content of the post. I urge you to read your posts more closely to see if they fit within our rules before hitting that ‘Reply’ button. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2024, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-hears-the-case-on-trumps-eligibility-on-february-8-2024/997204/151 "2024-02-08T22:23:47Z")
I do not know if the SCOTUS will take this into account but Trump apparently called Jan 6 an insurrection. But, he blamed Nancy Pelosi for it. > **[Trump Says Jan. 6 Was an Insurrection](https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-says-jan-6-insurrection-1234964730/)** > > Donald Trump said on Thursday that the Capitol attack on Jan. 6 was an insurrection caused by Nancy Pelosi. ---
**Author:** ![Love\_Rhombus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/love_rhombus/32/10694_2.png) [@Love\_Rhombus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Love_Rhombus)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2024, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-hears-the-case-on-trumps-eligibility-on-february-8-2024/997204/152 "2024-02-08T22:29:22Z")
I thought it was caused by Nikki Haley? ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2024, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-hears-the-case-on-trumps-eligibility-on-february-8-2024/997204/153 "2024-02-08T22:55:46Z")
> [@aceplace57](#): > > Trump hasn’t been convicted. Innocent until proven guilty. Maybe off-topic, but I _despise_ this shorthand. It’s more accurate to say “_merely accused_ until proven guilty” (although “not guilty unlit proven guilty” would also be okay. “Not guilty” is NOT interchangeable with “innocent”). “Innocent until proven guilty” is about the sloppiest proxy for “the accused enjoys a presumption of innocence” that I can imagine. ---
**Author:** ![rocking\_chair](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rocking_chair/32/2918_2.png) [@rocking\_chair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rocking_chair)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2024, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-hears-the-case-on-trumps-eligibility-on-february-8-2024/997204/154 "2024-02-08T22:59:35Z")
I tend to think of it as proven vs non proven, not guilt or innocence. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2024, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-hears-the-case-on-trumps-eligibility-on-february-8-2024/997204/155 "2024-02-08T23:01:42Z")
It’s often been said here (and elsewhere) that “not guilty” is not the same thing as “innocent.” US Courts only find you not guilty of a given offense. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2024, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-hears-the-case-on-trumps-eligibility-on-february-8-2024/997204/156 "2024-02-08T23:05:48Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > “Innocent until proven guilty” is about the sloppiest proxy for “the accused enjoys a presumption of innocence” that I can imagine. I agree completely. Some people talk about this as though guilt materializes out of nowhere upon conviction. It is the criminal act that makes someone guilty. There is always an uncertain true underlying state of guilt or innocence, the _presumption_ of innocence just determines the way the legal system will treat someone until a trial formally proves guilt. It doesn’t imply that the person is not _actually_ guilty before that, and outside of a formal legal context it doesn’t rule out the application of common sense in assessing likely guilt when the facts are widely known and the legal conclusion is incontrovertible. ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2024, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-hears-the-case-on-trumps-eligibility-on-february-8-2024/997204/157 "2024-02-08T23:06:14Z")
> [@Aspenglow](#): > > Moderating: > > > [@Hamlet](#): > > > > I will say you have the same extremely tenuous grasp of the relevant facts as Trump’s lawyers. So you got that going for you. > > You’re attacking the poster, not refuting what was asserted. This isn’t allowed, and you’ve been warned about doing it before. > > This is another warning for attacking the poster and not the content of the post. > > I urge you to read your posts more closely to see if they fit within our rules before hitting that ‘Reply’ button. You are absolutely correct. Instead of an off the cuff ad hominem, I should have pointed out that Trump verbally called for the insurrection, refused to try and stop it, and the intent of almost all involved in it was to stop the orderly transfer of power. I should have quoted the Colorado Court that found that Trump “acted with the specific intent to disrupt the Electoral College certification of President Biden’s electoral victory through unlawful means” and "acted with the specific intent to incite political violence and direct it at the Capitol.” My bad, and I apologize to Terosunbear and to you. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2024, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-hears-the-case-on-trumps-eligibility-on-february-8-2024/997204/158 "2024-02-08T23:08:05Z")
> [@rocking\_chair](#): > > i believe mitchell is stating that trump has the right to run, if he won, **congress would have time to lift the ban between the election and inauguration.** 2/3 of both Houses would be a pretty heavy lift, though, wouldn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2024, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-hears-the-case-on-trumps-eligibility-on-february-8-2024/997204/159 "2024-02-08T23:09:27Z")
It’s essentially a fig leaf of nominal due process used as an argument in support of not doing something more sensible that isn’t specified in the Constitution. ---
**Author:** ![rocking\_chair](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rocking_chair/32/2918_2.png) [@rocking\_chair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rocking_chair)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2024, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-hears-the-case-on-trumps-eligibility-on-february-8-2024/997204/160 "2024-02-08T23:13:21Z")
It would indeed. I do not believe the current make up of congress would lift the ban. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-hears-the-case-on-trumps-eligibility-on-february-8-2024/997204.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-hears-the-case-on-trumps-eligibility-on-february-8-2024/997204.md?page=9)