When Donald Trump took the oath of office once again, it was the last time he’d be able to do so under the country’s constitution. But that hasn’t stopped his team from flirting with the idea of running again, writes Alex Hannaford – and the Democrats are nowhere to be seen...
  • Wilco@lemm.eeEnglish
    1191·
    1 month ago

    Yes, but if Trump refuses to leave office then he will need some serious guards. My understanding of the Constitution is that he becomes a domestic threat at that point and “fighting him” is technically legal … and required by anyone that took an oath to defend the Constitution.

    • Omega@lemmy.world
      100·
      1 month ago

      Technically he’s barred from office per the 14th amendment.

      Technically is great until it’s ignored.

        • mapumbaa@lemmy.zipEnglish
          19·
          1 month ago

          It is impossible to write an eternal constitution. Believing that is the biggest flaw of the American mindset.

        • Omega@lemmy.world
          14·
          1 month ago

          Ideally the courts would rule on it and it would be up to congress with a supermajority to reverse it.

          To be clear, a court did rule that he committed treason and was barred from running. SCOTUS did not say they were wrong, they only stated that they (the fucking courts) did not have the power to APPLY THE CONSTITUTION.

          So yeah. It would be up to the courts to apply the constitution and SCOTUS would have the final word. I’m not sure why it would be any different from any other ammendment.

            • Omega@lemmy.world
              6·
              1 month ago

              If a Colorado court can decide to remove a candidate, then all the republicans need to do is get a majority in the courts of swing states and they would forever have the presidency.

              It should be up SCOTUS to validate or invalidate Colorado’s findings. It would never be Colorado as the final word. That’s how the courts already work. Lower courts rule and higher courts can take further action if needed.

              I’m all for SCOTUS reform though.

      • Coyote_sly@lemmy.worldEnglish
        182·
        1 month ago

        “I’m sure THIS will be the time he faces consequences for blatantly regarding both law and custom! Institutional inertia will protect us now for sure!” say a bunch of ignorant shitlibs for the 1,293,762nd time.

    • mapumbaa@lemmy.zipEnglish
      222·
      1 month ago

      The constitution means whatever the guy with the biggest guns says it means.

    • dryfter@lemm.eeEnglish
      14·
      1 month ago

      He’s already a domestic threat, he doesn’t care about the Constitution or laws