this post was submitted on 08 Jan 2025
88 points (87.9% liked)
Explain Like I'm Five
14584 readers
3 users here now
Simplifying Complexity, One Answer at a Time!
Rules
- Be respectful and inclusive.
- No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
- Engage in constructive discussions.
- Share relevant content.
- Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
- Use appropriate language and tone.
- Report violations.
- Foster a continuous learning environment.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You are probably correct. I mean, in reality neither is true until and unless the SCOTUS were to weigh in (so, just take a wild guess at what they'd choose?), but I would bet that's the justification they would use.
I think its just a 9-0 ruling that "claiming to have won an election" does not equate to being "elected" in the legal sense. It'd be silly even for the liberal justice to say he's ineligible, because of his claims that he won.