Varování
V této diskuzi se objevují odkazy a příspěvky obsahující vulgarismy.
Berte na vědomí, že jejich přítomnost ovlivňuje kvalitu komunikace a neodpovídá standardům slušného vyjadřování.
Bohužel jak Kavanaugh, tak Barrett i Gorsuch mnohdy překvapili s jejich
rozhodnutími. Roberts mi někdy připadá jako neřízená střela, člověk u
něj nikdy neví, kterým směrem půjde jeho rozhodnutí. Takže spoléhat se
na pohodlnou většinu 6:3 nikdy nelze.
A to se Trump zasadil o prosazení vlastně tří soudců Supreme Court !
The world needs more Fargo
Pohodlna vetsina ale neni v tomto pripade zapotrebi. Bude stacit vetsina jednoducha (5:4).
Citat:
This brings us to the thorniest part of Colorado’s decision to exclude Trump, namely the legal conclusion that his acts on Jan. 6 amounted to insurrection. The Colorado Supreme Court upheld a ruling to this effect by a lower Colorado court based on a few days of testimony plus reliance on Congress’ Jan. 6 proceedings.
The US Supreme Court could say this conclusion was flat wrong, which would protect Trump from other state courts trying to do the same thing. That would, however, require a majority of the justices to say that they are legally convinced that Trump’s Jan. 6 conduct doesn’t fit the constitutional meaning of insurrection. That’s hard to do without a more detailed factual record before the court; and it would subject the justices to withering public criticism from anti-Trumpers. (This wouldn’t technically preclude Jack Smith’s prosecution of Trump because that isn’t for a crime of insurrection, but it would drag the justices into factual matters about Jan. 6 that are at issue in the federal prosecution.)
The justices could alternatively say that the evidence presented in the Colorado lower court was insufficient to reach this conclusion. This would be milder, but could allow the issue to be re-litigated in Colorado and elsewhere with more evidence. The Supreme Court would probably view that as an invitation to legal chaos less than a year before the election.
The upshot is that a majority of the justices won’t like the idea of being responsible for blocking Trump from the ballot, so they would have to pick the least worst way of making the Colorado Supreme Court decision go away. The court now finds itself dragged into the ultimate political territory of a presidential election. That won’t be good for its legitimacy, no matter what it decides.
Jasne je pouze to ze demokrati budou tohle issue politizovat all the way to
the Supreme Court. 
Jak může nějaký soud kafrat do organizačních záležitostí politické strany? Co se to ve světě děje, volil ty soudce někdo?
