The dominoes are starting to fall in Trump world. The GOP frontrunning is still reeling from the appellate court ruling that he does not have presidential immunity for the January 6 insurrection. As they put it, “It would be a striking paradox if the President, who alone is vested with the constitutional duty to “take Care that the laws be faithfully executed,” were the sole officer capable of defying those laws with impunity.” That is a striking paradox indeed.
Scholars are weighing in this morning, in the early hours before the Supreme Court convenes at 10:00 a.m. ET. J. Michael Luttig has been adamant about the letter of the Constitution decreeing that Trump cannot be on the ballot. He sees things in black and white terms, that if Trump cannot be disqualified under the 14th Amendment, then basically nobody can. You hear that echo? Expect to hear it for some time to come. The judiciary may end up doing what the House and Senate were too gutless to do, which was to use the guardrails built into the Constitution to remove an egregiously unqualified man from the office of president. Right now it looks like that’s exactly how things are going to go down.
Now listen to this. SCOTUS may kick the case back to Judge Chutkan. “Trump could simultaneously get Supreme Court review but also have pre-trial proceedings that allow Judge Chutkan to move forward. That would make the court review in some respects meaningless if she’s empowered to forge ahead.” That sounds good. It sounds like what Judge Luttig was saying that basically the buck stops here.
Here are a few more comments by Luttig about MAGAs going wild in the streets.
“The disqualification of the former president is not what is anti-democratic, rather, the Constitution tells us that it is his insurrection against the Constitution, that is anti-democratic,” Luttig told “Morning Joe.” “Our Constitution could be characterized as anti-democratic in many, many different ways, foremost among which is that the Constitution guarantees us certain rights against the democratic process, so, but in this case, in particular, it’s the people through the ratification of Section 3 that decided that one who engages in an insurrection against the Constitution of the United States is ineligible to hold higher office.”
Luttig isn’t certain that a ruling against Trump would spark violence, but that possibility showed why the former president must never be allowed to hold public office again.
“I don’t really believe that if the Supreme Court disqualifies the former president that it will lead to rioting in the streets,” Luttig said. “On the other hand, what I would say is this: If the Supreme Court rules that he is qualified, 75 percent of America will accept that decision as the final decision about our Constitution. So I am only concerned about the 20 percent, if that, that would not accept the decision from the Supreme Court, exactly the way they did not accept the results of the last election.”
“But the question for America, not just the Supreme Court, is, you know, can we allow ourselves to be held hostage by threats of violence upon a Supreme Court decision?” the retired judge added. “If we are going to do that, we don’t have a Constitution anymore.”
The way things are going is that there are enough courts saying that Trump is wrong that eventually it should sink in. And no, I have not forgotten the 60 cases he lost over his stolen election claims. What Trump world needs to do now, and we will watch them do it, is convince MAGA that every organ of American government and life is thoroughly rotten, as compared to the unvarnished goodness of Donald Trump. That’s the argument. And it will be interesting to see how far it gets.
My guess is not very far. Trump is the charismatic leader of a very vocal minority and he also got a lot of votes in both 2016 and 2020 from people who felt that they were striking back at the establishment. Thank God there were eight million more voters in this country who knew which way the wind was actually blowing.
This is from Charlie Sykes’ newsletter yesterday and explains it all well.
What happens now? Our friends at Lawfare provide a detailed analysis:
The panel’s most aggressive move was not in the opinion itself, which is straightforwardly correct, but in the judgment that accompanies it on the docket. There, the panel gave the following directions regarding the “issuance of the mandate,” a next step that must take place before Judge Chutkan can resume Trump’s criminal trial:
The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate through February 12, 2024. If, within that period, Appellant notifies the Clerk in writing that he has filed an application with the Supreme Court for a stay of the mandate pending the filing of a petition for a writ of certiorari, the Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate pending the Supreme Court’s final disposition of the application. The filing of a petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc will not result in any withholding of the mandate, although the grant of rehearing or rehearing en banc would result in a recall of the mandate if the mandate has already issued.-
In effect, this means that Trump can only stop the issuance of the mandate by petitioning the Supreme Court for a stay pending a full application for certiorari, not by seeking rehearing either before the panel or the en banc D.C. Circuit. This is an extremely strong vote of confidence by the panel of how its decision might fare in front of the full D.C. Circuit. Such a demanding timeframe for Trump to file and for the court to consider a petition for a rehearing en banc might otherwise be seen as problematic or even disrespectful by other judges on the court. Assuming the panel is correct in its reading of its fellow judges, this move effectively forecloses one of the procedural steps that Trump might have otherwise used to further delay final resolution of the dispute, bringing the date of trial ever closer. Or at the very least, it would require the full court to intervene actively to stay the mandate if it wants to look at the case—which seems altogether unlikely.
As for the Supreme Court, the court’s judgment doesn’t do much other than compel Trump to seek a stay of the mandate pending a petition for certiorari within the week. Once he does, the mandate will be stayed until the Supreme Court decides that application. In short, it makes clear that the fate of Trump’s legal challenge—and thus the likelihood that he faces the D.C. criminal trial before the 2024 elections—lies entirely in the Supreme Court’s hands now.
**
Meanwhile, someone is NOT taking it well. At all.
I can’t remember who said it, but in watching some coverage of this yesterday evening with some legal pundits discussing this a question was posed and answered. The question was whether part of the delay in issuing a ruling was longer than expected for more than one reason. The main case made by legal eagles was we should be patient because the judges will want to craft a “bulletproof” Per Curiam opinion. That the Per Curiam part was important because with no judge signing it it would mean all were in agreement with all parts of the ruling. I still believe it took too long but that’s not the point. The question also was whether the judges circulated a draft(s) to the other judges on the DC Circuit for their thoughts/input. The answer was yes it was possible and even likely, and that’s part of what took extra time AND allowed for a Per Curiam (Latin for “For the Court”) ruling. Basically a signal the entire Circuit wouldn’t just agree with the panel’s opinion but do so quite quickly as in denying an en banc hearing. AND that that in turn allowed them to add in that provision that Trump had only until Monday to run to SCOTUS to stay the practical effect (giving the case back to judge Chutkan so her court could resume work on it) of the ruling to try and obtain a STAY (in addition to SCOTUS hearing an actual appeal) of the order.
Practically speaking Trump can’t waste more time trying for weeks more delay by attempting to get an en banc hearing from the DC Circuit. It’s SCOTUS stepping in with a stay early next week or judge Chutkan getting things back on track to Trump’s dismay. Tick-Tock motherfucker!
Love that the delay on the SCOTUS decision is about to end. Worried about their ruling however. The SCOTUS judges appointed under Rump a Dump are beholden to Rump a Dump. Even though they all took double oaths when sworn into SCOTUS – The Oath of Justices and Judges under 28 U.S.C. § 453; and The Constitutional Oath – they seem to have no qualms about violating both oaths. This is because they live in fear of their lives & the lives of their families for retaliation if they rule against him. Not by him personally but by all the power Putin wields over the GOP party, specifically Putin’s FSB agents, Russian Mafia agents, and by insane extremist right wing terrorists loyal to Rump a Dump.
Save presidential immunity! It doesn’t need saving, Donnyboy.
It DOESN’T EXIST in criminal cases. Period. No crimin’ when Prez.
I was thinking of having some T shirts made with that catchy phrase and sending them to my cousins who could be cult members. But then I figured they’d take it literally and actually wear the damn shirts in public! 🙂
why is this article (AND comments) conflating the two questions? Today the SCOTUS hears oral arguments on the BALLOT DISQUALIFICATION issue. The issue of Presidential immunity has not yet been appealed feom the DC per curiam ruling, and the SCOTUS might not even grant cert, but that is not what is being considered today.
Keep your cases straight!
Sadly, it looks liken they will force states to keep.him on the ballot. I was hoping they’d send it back to.the states since states control methods of voting within the state. They only like precedent when it jives with their political ideology. If they don’t stare decisis is thrown into the trash, along with women’s right to.control their own body, the right to vote by PoC, and separation of church and state
Let’s remember Who is on the court, i.e., corrupt, entitled perjurers, a belligerent drunk/accused rapist, and a religious cult member. And we expect justice from this bunch? Anyone know where the yellow brick road is located?