If he has dementia now, it is highly likely he cannot run in 2028. The thread only makes sense if his health holds up, as I think is probable and you apparently do not.
Re your mention of Cenk Uygur, it takes a lot less bravery for judges to keep him off the ballot than to keep Trump off.
If Trump does run, he could have his name on the primary ballot in red states — no problem. In blue states where judges have integrity, the GOP could endorse a total Trump loyalist who would throw their support to Donald on the second ballot. I think this would work.
As for keeping the GOP nominee off November ballots, judges won’t dare do that.
Only Congress can remove candidates for federal office from the presidential ballot in the context of the Insurrection Clause, is what the ruling says. It doesn’t require an act of Congress to determine that Trump has already been elected twice and is therefore ineligible to run again.
Not unless red states start rewriting their election laws real fast. I don’t know of any state whose laws allow someone who isn’t eligible for office to be listed as a candidate on the ballot.
Given how much damage he’s already done, in four years he’ll likely be able to just say “I’m staying on as President” and make it stick. No need for pesky elections; and quite possibly not even the ability to hold them anymore. The infrastructure to do anything like that seems likely to be destroyed, the way they are clear-cutting the government.
Re last post, I’m far from sure that my recent posts here are correct. Maybe the judiciary is about to clip Donald’s wings big time — or maybe not. Trump is consolidating power. We will see how much.
He’ll be appointing judges for the next four years that will make the current SCOTUS seem like it was made up of nine RBGs, and he is an obese male with a history of hospitalization for COVID. Given that I’d say the odds of father time preventing him getting a third term are better than the odds of the checks and balances in tbe US constitution doing so
Or more likely, nonexistent. Especially after 4 more years of dismantling the government. By then there might not even be any judges to rule against him.
Considering all the times Trump was supposedly given enough rope, then proceeding to make a nice hammock out of it, I’m just not in the mood to play games like that.
Also we know from the Colorado ballot case that Constitutional amendments may or may not have any meaning, if not implemented by a separate statute. Do we have a statute that implements the 22nd Amendment? If not, we’ll never get one now.
Dear me, the revolution is going to be so chaotic, and then the process of setting up America 2.0. will be such a difficult, long drawn out hassle. We didn’t get the first constitution until five years after the first revolution ended.
We had a pretty good run until about 2010 and the Citizens United ruling. They said that any organization would be able to donate as much money as it wished…and then they went and finished smashing the unions.
Exactly, @Czarcasm. I would not be at all surprised to see the Supreme Court rule that if Congress had intended that all loopholes be eliminated to prevent Trump from “serving” a third term, then they should have enumerated each and every one. Of course they would rule the exact opposite should a Democrat try it. Of course, no Democrat would ever try such a blatant end-run around the Constitution, because the Democrats still follow rules and norms while the Republicans are playing Calvinball and making up the rules as they go along to best benefit themselves.
That’s specific to the 14th and a few other amendments which contain an enforcement clause. Specifically, Section 5 of the 14th states “The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article,” because the amendment’s text is ambiguous and its purpose is to empower Congress to create legislation that it previously lacked the authority to create. For another example, the 18th amendment, which contains the same clause, was executed by Congress passing the Volstead Act.
The 22nd amendment has no enforcement clause, meaning it’s self-executing. It is not necessary for Congress to implement a law enforcing it because the meaning of the text is self-evident.
If Trump can ignore the federal courts, so can individual states. I can see a situation where the Supreme Court declares him eligible, but California and a bunch of other blue states say “Nope!” and keep him off the ballot. At which case shit gets real.
I wonder what would happen if, at the end of Trump’s second term, the Republicans made the presidency more of a figurehead position, and Vance or someone else became president but Trump kept effective power as, I don’t know, chairman of the Republican Party, or Secretary for Making America Great Again.
In such a situation, there is, of course, a high likelihood of the two leaders eventually clashing. What do you think – could they pull off such an arrangement?
(Recall that Putin had to step down as president of Russia from 2008 to 2012 but continued to rule indirectly as “prime minister” in tandem with President Dmitry Medvedev.)
(Another imperfect analogy – George Wallace continued to govern Alabama informally through his wife, Lurleen, who succeeded him as state governor.)
