It wasn’t just the conservative members of the US Supreme Court who pulled the plug on the cesspool of Democratic Party weaponization of the legal system. the liberals on the court saw it plain as day, too. SCOTUS ruled 9-0 that states can’t remove a presidential candidate from the national ballot. In question was Section 3 of the 14th Amendment which prohibits people who have taken part in insurrection from holding office, which some states like Colorado took upon itself to enforce. The high court ruled: “that States may disqualify persons holding or attempting to hold state office. But States have no power under the Constitution to enforce Section 3 with respect to federal offices, especially the Presidency.”
Further the court’s ruling stated: “Under the Amendment, States cannot abridge privileges or immunities, deprive persons of life, liberty, or property without due process, deny equal protection, or deny male inhabitants the right to vote (without thereby suffering reduced representation in the House).” The court explained that the 14th Amendment was instated after the Civil War in context of preventing insurrectionists to hold federal office. The court also maintained that a state’s secretary of state could not arbitrarily preclude a presidential candidate from the ballot as it would “sever the direct link that the Framers found so critical between the National Government and the people of the United States” as a whole.
The leftists on the court, Sotomayor, Kagan and Jackson concurred in the judgment stating “The fundamental principle of judicial restraint is practically as old as our Republic. This court is authorized “to say what the law is” only because “those who apply [a] rule to particular cases…must of necessity expound and interpret that rule.”…Today, the Court departs from that vital principle, deciding not just this case, but challenges that might arise in the future.” The leftist justices said that the conservative majority went too far in its decision and introduced novel rules to “foreclose future efforts to disqualify a Presidential candidate” under Section 3. The liberal justices wanted to leave open possibilities of the Court deciding how Section 3 can be used to bar “an oathbreaking insurrectionists from becoming President.”
SCOTUS unanimously stopped states from keeping a presidential candidate off the ballot. May it be a notice to those who would weaponize their position in government or in the judicial system against a particular person. Sadly, the Democratic Party-appointed justices still wanted to leave the door open for such persecution, which doesn’t totally drain the lawfare swamp. Proverbs 21:15 says, “Justice executed is a joy to the righteous, but a terror to the workers of iniquity.” The SCOTUS decision has restored some justice. More, however, needs to be done to prevent, as the majority said, depriving “persons of life, liberty, or property without due process, deny equal protection” because the administrative state is bending the law to use falsehoods and distortions to constitute due process and equal protection.
Sources:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-719_19m2.pdf
