Clarence Thomas asked one question that just won Trump this key 2024 Supreme Court case

Photo by Trump White House Archived, CC BY-SA 2.0, via Flickr, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/

The 2024 election will likely be decided in a courtroom.

That’s because Democrats know Joe Biden can’t win this election on the issues or on the basis of his record in office.

And now Clarence Thomas asked one question that just won Trump this key 2024 Supreme Court case.

Democrats tried to essentially cancel the 2024 election by stealing the right to vote against Joe Biden from the American people.

A Soros-funded group called Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics  in Washington (CREW) filed a lawsuit on behalf of voters in the deep blue state of Colorado demanding Secretary of State Jenna Griswald be allowed to ban Trump from the ballot using Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

CREW argued that the disqualification clause applied to Trump because he supposedly led an insurrection on January 6.

There was also a reason this case ended up in Colorado.

CREW knew that it needed a court finding from a friendly group of activists so Democrat Secretaries of States in battlegrounds like Michigan and Arizona could use that precedent to ban Trump from the ballot.

If Trump isn’t on the ballot in enough states to win 270 Electoral College votes, then Joe Biden wins by default.

Four far-Left ideologues on the Colorado State Supreme Court played their role and ruled Trump an insurrectionist and kicked him off the ballot.

Trump appealed to the Supreme Court, and right off the bat in oral arguments Clarence Thomas destroyed the argument to remove his name from the ballot.

Thomas asked CREW attorney Jason Murray for “contemporaneous examples” of state’s removing national candidates from the ballot following the ratification of the 14th Amendment.

Justice Thomas asked for an example from the time period  “shortly after the adoption of the 14th Amendment, where the states disqualified national candidates — not its own candidates.”

Murray couldn’t come up with a single time that a state booted a national candidate off the ballot because they were a Confederate who fought in the Civil War.

Murray sheepishly admitted it’s “not surprising that there are few examples” by claiming that “candidates were either write-in or they were party ballots, so the states didn’t run the ballots in the same way and there wouldn’t have been a process for determining before an election whether a candidate was qualified unlike the processes that we have now.”

Justice Thomas objected by saying that there were a “plethora of Confederates still around” in the period after the Civil War, which should allow Murray to find “a few examples of national candidates being disqualified, if your reading is correct.”

Since the only examples Murray could come up with were states disqualifying candidates running for state level office, he conceded defeat in this point.

“Other than the example I gave, no, but again, your Honor, that’s not surprising because there wouldn’t have been — states certainly wouldn’t have the authority to remove a sitting federal officer,” Murray responded.

Thomas’ question cut right to the heart of this matter.

Democrats wanted partisans at the state level to ban Trump from the ballot.

In essence, CREW defended the idea that four Democrat judges in one state should be able to decide who the opposition Party can field as a candidate.

It’s a recipe for chaos and disaster, and even the left-wing Judges on the Court appeared skeptical.

*Renewed Right Official Polling*