The court ruled unanimously. Did the republican justices get it wrong, too?
And George HW Bush appointed "republican" David Souter to the USSC, so that obviously means he was a conservative, right? The KSSC is currently composed (until Stegall joins) of hard leftists and a couple of squishy "moderates." Our current nominating process, by which a predominantly liberal group of attorneys first screens the candidates, has done a good job of ensuring this.
Anyway, back to the point you keep dodging, you really believe Taylor didn't lie when he "declared" that he's incapable of serving? Wow.
No, I don't. I certainly would never vote for him.
Ok, so you agree that Taylor lied in a notarized letter to the SoS. Now, would you also agree that lying to satisfy a legal requirement, in order to give your party a political advantage, is a dirty trick?
It's interesting to me that not a single justice thought to ask Mr. Taylor's attorney the reason he was incapable of serving. They didn't ask because they know he's lying (as we all do), and they are complicit in his lie by removing him from the ballot without requiring an explanation.
No, it's just following the letter of the law to get your name off of the ballot. If you don't want to be a senator, you don't have to be a senator.
No, you're still not getting this. It is most certainly not "following the letter of the law" to withdraw in the manner Taylor did unless he actually is incapable of serving. That's kind of the whole friggin point of the law. So, he lied.
Politicians lie all the time, of course. The difference here, and what makes this such a galling dirty trick, is that Taylor, a District Attorney, lied to the legal system, and a court of 6 esteemed jourists - who knew the same as you and I that he was lying - let him get away with it without so much as asking for a reason because of ideology.