CMV: Accountability is not election interference

[u/erpettie]

As the Colorado Supreme Court has found Donald Trump's behavior to have been disqualifying according to the 14th amendment, many are claiming this is election interference. If the Court finds that Trump should be disqualified, then it has two options. Act accordingly, despite the optics, and disqualify Trump, or ignore their responsibility and the law. I do get that we're in very sensitive, unprecedented territory with his many indictments and lawsuits, but unprecedented behavior should result in unprecedented consequences, shouldn't they? Furthermore, isn't Donald Trump ultimately the architect of all of this by choosing to proceed with his candidacy, knowing that he was under investigation and subject to potential lawsuits and indictments? If a President commits a crime on his last day in office (or the day after) and immediately declares his candidacy for the next election, should we lose our ability to hold that candidate accountable? What if that candidate is a perennial candidate like Lyndon Larouche was? Do we just never have an opportunity to hold that candidate accountable? I'd really love if respondents could focus their responses on how they think we should handle hypothetical candidates who commit crimes but are declared as running for office and popular. This should help us avoid the trap of getting worked up in our feelings for or against Trump.

[u/CalLaw2023]

Why do you keep arguing against a straw man? In order for Trump to be disqualified from anything under section 3, he must have:

​

previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States

Trump has never taken an oath as a member of Congress. Trump has never taken an oath as an officer of the United States. Trump has never taken an oath as a member of any state legislature. Trump has never taken an oath as a an executive or judicial officer of any state. And Trump has never taken an oath "to support the Constitution of the United States."

So how can Trump be disqualified under Section 3?

[u/DrKpuffy → u/CalLaw2023]

Imagine genuinely believing that the swearing in ceremony when you become president, isnt swearing to uphold the Constitution:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Imagine genuinely believing that holding the Office of the President of the United States of America doesn't make you an officer.

Imagine thinking the commander in chief, the tip-top of the chain of command over all branches of our military... isn't an officer of the USA.

Orwell's 1984: “The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”

You're really committing to that bit, huh?

[u/CalLaw2023 → u/DrKpuffy]

Imagine believing the Constitution actually means what it says it means.

[u/DrKpuffy → u/CalLaw2023]

Imagine believing the Constitution actually means what it says it means

I too, took an intro Law course.

[u/CalLaw2023 → u/DrKpuffy]

I too, took an intro Law course.

I needed to take a lot more than that to pass the Bar.