CNN’s senior legal expert Elie Honig expressed serious questions about the fairness and legality of Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows’ decision to remove President Donald Trump from the state ballot.
Honig, noted for his acute legal analysis, emphasized Bellows’ unorthodox and faulty reasoning, emphasizing that she is not a professional lawyer.
Honig’s criticism is centered on the fact that Bellows based her decision on a variety of sources, including YouTube footage and news stories. These are items that, according to Honig, would not be admissible in a typical court setting.
“She’s not a lawyer, by the way. It’s a smartly written decision, clearly consulted with lawyers, but this is an unelected – she’s chosen by the state legislature. She’s elected by the state legislature. Chosen by the legislature, but not democratically elected, not enough,” Honig explained.
Honig also emphasized the procedural issues that led to the disqualification. According to the verdict, the hearing was based mainly on the testimony of a single fact witness, a liberal legal professor.
Bellows’ ruling was suspended awaiting a judicial review, but it was nonetheless severely defective, according to George Washington law professor Jonathan Turley. He called it a “litany of conclusory statements” wrapped in cliches such as “defending democracy” while summarily disenfranchising people from voting. The constitutional attorney also explained that the events of January 6 don’t qualify as an “insurgency” and expressed severe doubt that the 14th amendment prohibition in question was even applicable to presidents.
……The “decision” is a litany of conclusory statements consistent with Bellows’ prior public condemnations of the “insurrection” and Trump. It will now be subject to judicial review where Maine judges will hopefully show the same fealty to the constitution as other courts in…
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) December 29, 2023
Turley also dismantled Bellow’s unilateral decision to strike Trump from the Maine ballot while on Fox News.
Jonathan Turley: “It is really striking how Bellows cloaks herself as a defender of democracy in this statement when she is preventing voters from casting their vote for what is currently the leading candidate for the presidency. So it’s a very odd claim to make in my view.” pic.twitter.com/Q64dUzBQrL
— MAGA War Room (@MAGAIncWarRoom) December 29, 2023
“It is really striking how Bellows cloaks herself as a defender of democracy in this statement when she is preventing voters from casting their vote for what is currently the leading candidate for the presidency. So it’s a very odd claim to make in my view.”
The law professor than said that he hoped SCOTUS will take up the case and act “with unanimity to put this dangerous theory away for good.”
If the world’s governments plan to drastically depopulate the planet by 2025, then who cares? From all the ‘demands’ these primitive minded globalists come up with, there won’t be very many people OR democracy, so again, who cares? Eliminating all Repubs while eliminating most of the people seems the easiest way to go rather than actually SOLVE the planet’s problems caused by MAN which proves what a simple-minded, self-centered bunch of morons these globalists actually are. I’m not impressed…