They’re following the specific language of the 14th amendment. That’s terrorism now? It actually doesn’t say he needs to be convicted of any insurrection – it says that he needs to have participated in an insurrection. And, it provides a specific check and balance (two-thirds vote in congress) if a court is attempting to keep him off the ballot improperly.

It sounds like we have a difference of factual understanding of what happened on January 6th. Where are you getting “empty nothings”? I saw this is why I’m saying it wasn’t nothing.

A judge did say he was an insurrectionist.

Maybe you need to go read the 14th amendment and also the rulings.

The legal process was followed. The courts decided. Don’t like it? Tough shit.

I didn’t like it when the SCOTUS said to stop counting and give the election to Bush.

Nice concern trolling, lmao.

That’s not an England perspective. It’s a moron perspective. I’m betting there are quite a few people in England who are at least a little less idiotic.

From an Australian perspective, yeah, nah.

Lol. U mad bro?

Colorado has literally done exactly this before to keep a non-natural born citizen off the ballot, and none other than Judge Gorsuch decided that case. In his ruling he wrote that the state has a right to conduct their elections in a way to ensure their stability and in accordance with their laws. Thomas ruled the same way in Bish v Gore, and the SC ruled the same way while overturning key provisions in the Voting Rights Act.

I wonder what the difference is this time that would make conservatives do a full reverse and say states cannot control their own elections?

Are you from England?

If it was nothing how come people went to Jail for Insurrection?

How dumb can you be

He doesn’t need to be convicted