I would honestly consider a court removing a candidate from a ballot to be massive government overreach if we hadn't written this exact scenario into the Constitution 155 years ago.
The larger story is that 49 states have still failed uphold the 14th amendment requirement that Trump be removed, and we're reaching the three-year anniversary of J6.
Without a 2/3 vote of Congress to override this rule, it is illegal to put him on the ballot. Colorado is the only state obeying this law today.
States need to stop waiting for the court's permission and take action now. The Constitution never said the courts were responsible for removing a seditious candidate.
It is the state election offices that are required to operate as required by the Constitution. That includes omitting candidates that have participated in a sedition until a proper vote by Congress.
Not a single state election office took real action, they had to be forced in Colorado.
@Alex I (layman) certain see this as a valid point interpretation of the law as written. And I'm grateful for anything halting his terrible momentum. But it's still a terrifying precedent.
The lower court's ruling of his guilt with tons of evidence is the next best thing to a jury criminal conviction, but I'm still worried about the precedent being abused.
The one lesson we need to take from everything that has happened is that we CANNOT rely on the good intentions of anyone in power AT ALL.
Due process has already been served. Donald Trump, at a minimum, can be said to have given aid or comfort to hundreds criminals collectively convicted of over 600 crimes related to insurrection or rebellion against the United States. Many of those convicted have testified that they were obeying commands from Trump, and those commands were public and visible to all of us on Social Media.
He doesn't need to be convicted of anything to meet the 14th Amendment's disqualification clause.