Supreme Court to Decide Whether Trump Can Run for President or Not

Riddle me this: If Democrats are so confident they can win against Trump in 2024, then why are they bending over backward to try and keep him off the ballot?

It’s like trying to win a boxing match by tying your opponent’s hands together!

Here’s the scoop: There’s a legal debate now before the Supreme Court that aims to determine whether Donald Trump should even be allowed on the 2024 ballot.

The case is brought by John Castro, a tax attorney gunning for the Republican nomination.

He’s asking whether political candidates can challenge the eligibility of another candidate in the same party based on a ‘diminution of votes.’

Oh, but it doesn’t stop there—Castro wants to argue that Trump shouldn’t be allowed to run because of section three of the 14th Amendment, which bars folks from office if they’ve ‘engaged in insurrection or rebellion.’ Seriously?

Trump, of course, has pleaded not guilty to all charges he’s facing, and he’s called these moves to keep him off the ballot exactly what they look like: dirty tricks.

In his own words, ‘It is just another ‘trick’ being used by the Radical Left to again steal an election that their candidate is incapable of winning in a free and fair election.’

And he’s not wrong, folks.

Most legal experts are calling these efforts a long shot.

This election is going to be absolutely nuts.https://t.co/I0kFQOb38f

— Dinesh D'Souza (@DineshDSouza) September 6, 2023

"If a state Secretary of State were to strike Donald Trump's name from the ballot, after he is the Republican nominee, I am sure there'd be a challenge, and I'm sure the challenge would go all the way to the Supreme Court." — Judge Andrew Napolitano@RobFinnertyUSA @Judgenap pic.twitter.com/LcdFiO1vdY

— NEWSMAX (@NEWSMAX) September 5, 2023

Should Supreme Court disqualify Trump from running? It now looks as if justices may be asked to rule https://t.co/98LT8AQ0km

— Bo Snerdley (@BoSnerdley) September 6, 2023

So, what’s the game here?

If the Democrats really believe they can beat Trump, why not just do it the good ol’ American way—by getting more votes?

Because let me tell you, nothing threatens the fabric of our democracy more than trying to stifle the will of the people.

If you’re confident in your candidate, prove it at the ballot box!

You know what this tells me?

That they’re not confident.

They’re not convinced they can win without sidelining their most formidable opponent.

And, folks, that’s not how democracy works—that’s how desperation works.

Newsweek has more details on the case heading to the Supreme Court:

The legal debate about whether or not former President Donald Trump should be allowed to appear on the 2024 ballot has made its way before the Supreme Court.

The court distributed John Castro v. Donald Trump to the justices for conference on Wednesday ahead of the upcoming term, which will begin on October 2. Conference is to take place on September 26 and the case is expected to be decided on or before October 9.

Castro, a tax attorney running for the Republican nomination next year, sent his petition to the Supreme Court last month, asking the justices to answer whether political candidates can challenge the eligibility of another candidate of the same party running for the same nomination “based on a political competitive injury in the form a diminution of votes.”

The lawsuit is seeking to argue that Trump should not be allowed to run for the White House based on section three of the 14th Amendment, which disqualifies individuals from holding public office if they have “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against the United States. While Trump has not been charged with insurrection, Castro is pointing to Trump’s role in the January 6 Capitol riot.

The former president, who has pleaded not guilty to all charges in four criminal indictments this year, blasted attempts to remove his name from his ballot using the constitutional clause on Monday, remarking that most in the legal field have already called those efforts a long shot and warned that they could prove to be tricky water to navigate.

“Almost all legal scholars have voiced opinions that the 14th Amendment has no legal basis or standing relative to the upcoming 2024 Presidential Election,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

“Like Election Interference, it is just another ‘trick’ being used by the Radical Left Communists, Marxists, and Fascists, to again steal an Election that their candidate, the WORST, MOST INCOMPETENT, & MOST CORRUPT President in U.S. history, is incapable of winning in a Free and Fair Election. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!”

Don’t you think it’s a little—how shall Iput this—convenient that all of these lawsuits are surfacing now?

Why is it always a ‘long shot’?

I mean, if you were making a movie, this would be the part where the suspenseful music starts playing.

So here’s the latest chapter in what’s starting to look like the longest-running legal drama of all time: Six Colorado voters have filed a lawsuit to keep Trump off their state’s ballots, citing—you guessed it—the 14th Amendment.

They’re saying anyone who ‘engaged in insurrection or rebellion’ shouldn’t be eligible to hold office.

And surprise, surprise, they’re being helped by the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

Isn’t it curious how everything lines up so neatly?

And talk about timing!

The theory that the 14th Amendment disqualifies Trump has been gaining traction ever since two conservative law professors wrote about it last month.

But it’s still considered a ‘legal long shot,’ folks.

Trump would no doubt appeal any ruling, and guess where the final decision might lie?

With a Supreme Court that has a conservative supermajority, including three justices he appointed!

“This is one of the most fundamental questions that could ever be decided under our Constitution,” Judge Luttig tells @AliVelshi on the case for disqualifying Trump. “And it will be decided by the Supreme Court sooner rather than later." https://t.co/DKhAJHOfqn pic.twitter.com/5tRoSlrArS

— MSNBC (@MSNBC) September 3, 2023

Trump Disqualified? Supreme Court Makes Blockbuster 2024 Announcement. pic.twitter.com/aQ4MLkTnII

— Conservative Brief (@ConservBrief) September 6, 2023

You know something is really strange when CNN ignores my case pending before the U.S. Supreme Court yet covers CREW’s lawsuit that has ZERO standing.

It’s almost like these morons want Trump to win. CNN is the WORST. Absolute TRASH.https://t.co/wkzc0HlEWC

— 🇺🇸 John Anthony Castro (@realJohnACastro) September 7, 2023

So, why is it ‘long shot’ after ‘long shot’?

Why are these legal proceedings making headlines now, of all times?

Trump says it’s a witch hunt, and folks, you’ve gotta admit, it’s hard not to see some kind of coordinated effort here.

It’s like trying to solve a jigsaw puzzle where everyone is hiding pieces behind their backs.

The New York Times confirms a Colorado lawsuit is working to keep Trump off the ballot:

Six Colorado voters filed a lawsuit on Wednesday seeking to keep former President Donald J. Trump off the state’s ballots under the 14th Amendment, which says anyone who “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against the Constitution after taking an oath to defend it is ineligible to hold office.

The lawsuit, which was filed in a state district court in Denver with the help of the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, demands that the Colorado secretary of state not print Mr. Trump’s name on the Republican primary ballot. It also asks the court to rule that Mr. Trump is disqualified in order to end any “uncertainty.”

The theory that the 14th Amendment disqualifies Mr. Trump has gained traction among liberals and anti-Trump conservatives since two prominent conservative law professors argued in an article last month that his actions before and during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol constituted engagement in an insurrection. But it remains a legal long shot. Mr. Trump would surely appeal any ruling that he was ineligible, and a final decision could rest with the Supreme Court, which has a conservative supermajority that includes three justices he appointed.

Look, if you’re gonna go after someone, at least be straightforward about it.

Don’t try to cloak it in legalese and loopholes.

If this isn’t a coordinated effort to sideline Trump before the 2024 election, I don’t know what is.

If you’re confident your candidate can win, why not let democracy do its thing?

But hey, when you’re out of ideas, I guess desperate times call for desperate measures!”