[cotton1706]

Justice Barrett concurs in part and concurs in the judgment. She agrees that states do not have the power to enforce Sec. 3 against presidential candidates but would not go further and address whether federal legislation is the only way that Section 3 can be enforced.

[volare737]

9-0 decision

[shadeaud]

Libs are in circle jerk melt down. Totally expected decision. However the court didn’t rule on President Trump
That he did not engage in any “ insurection” on Jan 6( Not an issue to contemplate).

[Chewbarkah]

Barrett’s “reasoning” is ironic and a bit scary: SCOTUS mustn’t clarify all the legal issues being used to stir up partisan rancor and interfere in the election, because ... clarity might stir up partisan rancor. She wants the SC to self-limit to placate the (potential) howling mob.

Yeah, that’ll work...

[Political Junkie Too]

would not go further and address whether federal legislation is the only way that Section 3 can be enforced

Barret is on shaky ground if she thinks this.

1. Section 5 says that "Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article," not the states.

2. If states can also have power to enforce federal legislation on the 14th amendment, then why can't states also have the power to enforce Article I Section 8 rules of naturalization regarding illegal alien entry into their states?

-PJ