Federal Court tosses lawsuit to use 14th amendment to remove Trump from ballot

Judge finds “no standing” to sue. Are the attempts to get judicial decisions keeping Trump off the ballot over? Of course not, but this is another sign that such attempts are likely to be unsuccessful.

So we want to skip the insurrection indictment, an insurrection trial, and the insurrection conviction, and just have the courts "assume" Trump is guilty of a crime he has not been actually accused of in any court.

Because let's be clear here, with as many so called crimes that the former President is accused of, leading an insurrection is not one of them. I know this is difficult for some liberals to understand, but political rhetoric (in this case mind-numbingly dumb rhetoric) is not a legal argument. To remove someone from the ballot for committing the crime of insurrection you actually have to do more than suggest it happened.

Now in this case, the courts ruled that the party has no "standing" to sue. To some degree, the court is offering that no individual has standing to sue to prevent another individual from running for office. The court also referenced two other examples of people attempting to disqualify sitting legislatures from office for "participating" in the Jan 6th protests.

However, an individual citizen does not have standing to challenge whether another individual is qualified to hold public office. See, e.g., Kerchner, 612 F.3d at 207; Berg v. Obama, 586 F.3d 234, 239 (3d Cir. 2009).

Further, at least two courts have concluded that citizens attempting to disqualify individuals from participating in elections or from holding office based on the January 6, 2021 events at the United States Capitol lacked standing.

Lastly the complaint uses the reasoning that "legal scholars" have offered that Trump led an insurrection, in lieu of an actual criminal conviction of such a charge. Obviously we in America do not substitute the opinions of media scholars with the idea of being innocent until proven guilty in the eyes of a jury of our peers. Our constitution prevents someone from being deemed "guilty" based on any opinion other than that of a Judge or Jury. Bottom line. Until a jury determines differently, Trump is not guilty of any insurrection and will not be assumed guilty of said crime in any future federal court. Since nobody has or will be charging him with "insurrection" the idea of disqualifying someone who is innocent (by constitutional standards) is simply not going to happen at any federal level.

Obviously we will see if there are some state courts whom are so corrupt as to ignore the bill of rights and disqualify Trump. I wouldn't put it past a couple of states to be so corrupt, but likely these would be states that are not exactly competitive. If Trump is not on the ballot in California, for instance, what real difference does it make to him? Not like he was going to win there.