Thursday, July 25, 2024
League of Power

The League of power


"Brought to you by Global Liberty News"

Most Popular

Supreme Court Humiliates Democrat Party in 9-0 Decision for Donald Trump

The entire Democrat Party just got de-pantsed in front of the cheerleading squad. Then, the Supreme Court dunked their heads in the toilet, gave them a swirlie, and stuffed them in a locker like the dorks that they are.

The American people can now take a much-deserved victory dance on the left’s erotic dreams of excluding Donald Trump from the ballot for “muh insurrekshun.”

It was a 9-0 decision. Not even close.

The Supreme Court made a surprise announcement on Friday that they would be issuing a rare Monday morning ruling this week. That led to a lot of speculation over the weekend that the court would rule on the Colorado Supreme Court’s illegal decision to exclude Trump from the ballot this week.

That speculation was correct.

 

It was a rare Monday morning ruling and a rare 9-0 decision. Even Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who is not sure what a woman is, was unconvinced by Colorado’s lame arguments.

Trump’s name was going to appear on the Colorado Republican primary ballot no matter what. The ballots had already been printed when the Colorado Supreme Court made its illegal ruling. There was a sense of urgency in the high court’s ruling on the case, since Colorado votes on Super Tuesday (March 5th).

Trump is absolutely going to win the 2024 primary in Colorado and would have done so even without his name on the ballot. Millions of MAGA voters would have staged the largest write-in campaign in history. But because the Democrats are evil, they planned to not even count all the legitimate Trump votes.

The three liberal justices on the court concurred with the majority, even though they weren’t happy about it. Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson all took the opportunity to whine about the Dobbs decision that overturned Roe v. Wade. Huh?

Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s conclusion was also weird. She complained that she didn’t like the “tone” of the majority opinion, writing:

“Particularly in this circumstance, writings on the Court should turn the national temperature down, not up.”

As soon as her hair turns grey, she’s going to morph into another Sandra Day O’Connor and be a constant disappointment to conservatives. It’s not the Supreme Court’s job to police the nation’s tone during presidential election years. It’s the court’s duty to interpret the law and issue rulings on it. Sometimes, when the court receives an outlandishly stupid ruling from a lower court like this one, the high court gives the lower court a much-deserved spanking.

Nearly 20 other state cases seeking to kick Trump off the ballot for insurrection just went up in flames with this ruling. Every one of those cases is now moot, and Trump’s legal team can focus solely on the bogus prosecutions from Alvin Bragg and Jack Smith.

Colorado and the other states were trying to kick Trump off the ballot under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, the “insurrection” clause. As the 9-0 majority opinion notes, however, Section 5 of that very same amendment solely vests the power to enforce Section 3 in the Congress. States cannot enforce Section 3 under any circumstance.

Neither can a Secretary of State, like what happened in Maine. It certainly can’t be enforced by a traffic court judge, which is what happened in Illinois last week. (Yes, the Illinois woman who unilaterally decided to kick Trump off the ballot last week is a traffic court judge.)

The main takeaway that Americans should draw from this ruling is that Donald Trump did not engage in an insurrection against the US government.

From the ruling:

“These are not the only reasons the States lack power to enforce this particular constitutional provision with respect to federal offices. But they are important ones, and it is the combination of all the reasons set forth in this opinion—not, as some of our colleagues would have it, just one particular rationale—that resolves this case. In our view, each of these reasons is necessary to provide a complete explanation for the judgment the court unanimously reaches.”

“The judgment of the Colorado Supreme Court is reversed.

“The mandate shall issue forthwith.

“Suck it, libs!”

Okay, they didn’t actually write that last sentence. That was me. Unlike Amy Coney Barrett, I’m unconcerned with “lowering the temperature” or policing my tone as we’re trying to save the country.


Most Popular

These content links are provided by Content.ad. Both Content.ad and the web site upon which the links are displayed may receive compensation when readers click on these links. Some of the content you are redirected to may be sponsored content. View our privacy policy here.

To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected].

Family-Friendly Content

Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that Content.ad always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More



Most Popular
Sponsored Content

These content links are provided by Content.ad. Both Content.ad and the web site upon which the links are displayed may receive compensation when readers click on these links. Some of the content you are redirected to may be sponsored content. View our privacy policy here.

To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected].

Family-Friendly Content

Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that Content.ad always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More

About The Author

2 Comments

Leave A Response

Array