Even before President Joe Biden’s long-speculated withdrawal from the 2024 presidential race, allies of former President Donald Trump floated the possibility of suing to block Democrats from having anyone other than Biden on the ballot in November.

But election administration and legal experts said the timing of Biden’s exit on Sunday makes it unlikely that any Republican ballot access challenges will succeed, with some calling the idea “ridiculous” and “frivolous.” Democrats are on safe legal ground as they identify a new standard-bearer, they say, because the party hasn’t officially chosen its nominee. That typically occurs with a vote of delegates at the party’s convention.

It’s ridiculous for people to talk about ‘replacing Biden.’ He hasn’t been nominated yet,” said Richard Winger, a leading expert on state ballot access laws and the longtime editor of the “Ballot Access News” newsletter.

  • takeda@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    89
    ·
    9 months ago

    They absolutely have no legal basis, my only worry is that they have activists in SCOTUS which showed us multiple times that they don’t care what the Constitution says.

    • dragontamer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Historically speaking, we Americans usually ignore what the SCOTUS says. Virginia was practically segregated into the early 1970s, for example, well over a decade after Brown v Board of Education.

      That’s the hilarious part of the SCOTUS. They kind of don’t matter.


      The response to an unjust SCOTUS is to ignore them. Like what are they actually gonna do about it?

        • dragontamer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Step 1 of the plan is to at least make people aware of the plan.

          There’s more options available than expanding the court or whatever. Ultimately, the reigns of power largely rest in Congress and the President. Supreme Court is the moral center, they’re only effective if people believe their judgements to be moral and just. Otherwise, their statements are just fancy words on a piece of obscure paper.

          Supreme Court has no ability to write laws or enforce them.

    • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      There may be an issue with Ohio. The deadline for getting on the ballot the is like 2 days before the DNC, and we won’t officially know who the nominee will be until after the convention.

  • norimee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    9 months ago

    They already made it public that they will do everything to invalidate democrat votes and that they won’t accept any outcome that isn’t a Trump win.

    It’s going to be Jan 2021 but worse again.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    It’s stupid enough that Ohio demands that the nominee be on the ballot before the convention and even they give a deadline after August.

  • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    9 months ago

    Given the bizzaro timeline we’re in it would not surprise me to get a crazy outcome:

    • GOP lawsuit wins, forcing the ballot to be Biden
    • Biden wins the general election, immediately resigns and…
    • Harris is the President.

    What would be really hilarious is, I think that would allow her to serve two more 4 year terms after her 2025-2029 term ends because she would not have run as President the first time.

  • Lemminary@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    You know as they say: if it looks ridiculous and sounds ridiculous, it’s most likely the GOP.

  • Maple Engineer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    9 months ago

    They should have been running on a platform instead of grievance politics. Then it wouldn’t matter who they were running against.

  • RageAgainstTheRich@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Maybe don’t have a platform where the only thing you do is shit on the other person and call them kindergarten level nicknames? What a bunch of snowflakes.

  • Paragone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    This may well work for the repubs, though.

    They want dictatorship, not representative-republic ( falsely-called “democracy” by us foolish peons ).

    Legalism, which the christ they pretend to be aligned-with, repeatedly railed against, calling its devotees “Hypocrites!”…

    https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=hypocrite&version=AMP

    I believe that in the gaslighting-about-being-aligned-with-christ republican territories … they’re going to get that result to happen…

    Which only could have been prevented had the dems put Harris in the race months ago…

    _ /\ _

  • OccamsRazer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    9 months ago

    Given where we are now, it seems obvious that you would let the delegates pick the candidate, but it’s sort of strange that The People don’t actually get any say in who the candidate is. Kamala will get the nomination from the ruling class alone. It’s an option that could be used to circumvent the democratic process. Something to keep an eye on.