On Monday morning, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling determining that former President Donald Trump, who is running for president a third time, is eligible for the 2024 ballot in every state in the country, despite two states previously determining that he shouldn’t be able to run because he violated the insurrection clause of the U.S. Constitution., which does not list who wrote the order. The ruling indicated, however, that all nine justices agreed with the outcome.
The court’s majority categorically said that any challenges to Trump’s eligibility had to originate from Congress, not from states themselves, although four of the justices did not agree with that idea.. “But States have no power under the Constitution to enforce Section 3 with respect to federal offices, especially the Presidency.”
“The majority announces that a disqualification for insurrection can occur only when Congress enacts a particular kind of legislation,” the three liberal jurists — Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson — wrote in their concurring judgment. “We cannot join an opinion that decides momentous and difficult issues unnecessarily, and we therefore concur only in the judgment.
“You know that whole requirement in Section 1, Article II of the Constitution, that the president has to be a natural born citizen? Guess what? Absent Congressional action, that provision is meaningless,”
Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: FOX26Houston - 🏆 448. / 53 Read more »
Source: latimes - 🏆 11. / 82 Read more »
Source: fox28columbus - 🏆 249. / 63 Read more »
Source: ABC - 🏆 471. / 51 Read more »
Source: NBCNews - 🏆 10. / 86 Read more »
Source: RollingStone - 🏆 483. / 51 Read more »