But the factual finding as to insurrection after a trial by the Colorado Supremes normally cannot be rejected in federal court and Gorsuch ruling held firm to the intent of the Constitution as to the meaning of the 14th without applying all the other procedural arguments like “enabling” etc ????
But the factual finding as to insurrection after a trial by the Colorado Supremes normally cannot be rejected in federal court and Gorsuch ruling held firm to the intent of the Constitution as to the meaning of the 14th without applying all the other procedural arguments like “enabling” etc ????
The SCOTUS can find that Congress hasn't defined 'insurrection' thus negating the 'factual finding' of the CO Sup Ct. Gorsuch's prior ruling was with respect to a state statute enforcing the requirement for election as president under Article II of the Constitution, not the 14th Amendment.
But the factual finding as to insurrection after a trial by the Colorado Supremes normally cannot be rejected in federal court and Gorsuch ruling held firm to the intent of the Constitution as to the meaning of the 14th without applying all the other procedural arguments like “enabling” etc ????
The SCOTUS can find that Congress hasn't defined 'insurrection' thus negating the 'factual finding' of the CO Sup Ct. Gorsuch's prior ruling was with respect to a state statute enforcing the requirement for election as president under Article II of the Constitution, not the 14th Amendment.