I’m sure you’ve heard by now Trump has filed an appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court over his being denied ballot access. Actually from Colorado two appeals have already been filed, one by the GOP and one from the State of Colorado which has until this Friday (Jan. 5) to finalize the ballots for it’s primary and they can be printed. As it stands, Trump’s name will be on it (the “win” he was crowing about) but unless there’s a ruling from SCOTUS overturning the Colorado (and Maine’s) decision to deny him based on the 14th Amendment any vote for Trump in the Colorado primary won’t count. It will however make for one hot, confusing mess and generate a huge s**t storm, especially if Trump gets the most votes. Well, that’s another story for another time if things play out that way.
In the meantime, as The Hill reports Trump for a change doesn’t want a moment’s delay. He wants SCOTUS to rule and do so right away. As if right effing NOW! As you’d expect Trump’s appeal contains the “usual hits” but the interesting part is that he wants to skip right past oral arguments and the normal procedure:
Trump’s petition asks that the Supreme Court agree to take up the case and immediately reverse the Colorado ruling in a summary decision without oral argument or extensive briefing. The other parties in the case previously agreed the justices should hear the case on an expedited schedule, so a decision may be issued before most states’ primaries, but they did not suggest the high court forgo the step of holding oral arguments.
Many of you might be thinking, especially if you’ve listened to/read various legal and/or Constitutional experts weigh in on this that Trump should be careful what he wishes for. Especially since one of the sitting Justices (Gorsuch) once wrote an opinion that he’d have trouble backtracking on to rule in Trump’s favor. Still, Trump is counting on “his” Justices to join Thomas and Alito (judge Aileen Cannon’s role models) who will be dutiful lapdogs to do him a solid. And they might. Many of the same legal pundits who say the language in the amendment combined with prior court rulings and evidence leaves SCOTUS no choice fear they will try to find one. Even if they have to make up some truly astounding bullshit. Hey, it’s not like conservatives haven’t done so in recent decades!
However, SCOTUS does I believe have a possible way out. Again I must emphasize I’m not a lawyer, much less one experienced in Constitutional Law. I do however have a pretty good understanding of politics and thanks to conservatives who spent damned near four decades to create the federal judiciary and Supreme Court we now have SCOTUS is in fact a political institution. So you ask what is their out? Their off-ramp? Try this on for size:
Colorado’s deadline for establishing what will be on the printed ballots is Friday. Even skipping oral arguments (fat chance) that deadline will be blown and Trump’s name WILL appear on the ballot. So, let’s assume they grant Cert and hear the case. With all the bells and whistles. Even with an expedited schedules for briefs and oral arguments. They don’t have to issue a ruling right away! Nope. They can wait until the end of the term which isn’t until JUNE. Think about that.
In the meantime all manner of things might happen. If as seems highly likely Trump loses his immunity appeal and the DC Circuit doesn’t a) waste precious time shooting Trump down and b) they refuse to hold an En Banc hearing Trump’s DC trial set to start in March can do so. SCOTUS itself doesn’t have to grant Cert and hear an appeal from Trump on the criminal immunity issue. The can simply (and quickly) issue a one word statement saying “The petitioner’s request for a writ of Certiorari is denied.” In fact, as I wrote about yesterday I think that’s exactly what they’ll do.
Stay with me. Let’s say Trump goes on trial in DC, if not in the first week of March as scheduled but before the end of that month there will be a verdict in late April or early May. It’s possible there might be a holdout on the jury but odds are Trump will be convicted. And oh my will THAT change the calculus of how SCOTUS might rule on the whole ballot access issue. Trump (and his minions) whine about lack of “due process” by which they mean Trump not having been convicted in a court of law on the kinds of crimes/actions cited in the 14th amendment. A conviction in DC would blow that up like the Battleship Arizona at Pearl Harbor. SCOTUS wouldn’t wait until June to rule against Trump. Even though Trump will likely be the presumptive nominee well before then, there will still be ten primaries/contests in May and June. Anyone think knowing he can appear on the November ballot will affect the outcomes?
SCOTUS will in this scenario justify it’s tardiness in fancy legal talk about this all being unprecedented (which for a major Party candidate it is) but that since it’s up to a PARTY to decide it’s rules for how delegates are allocated for “reasons” it didn’t require SCOTUS to make a ruling right away. That the real issue was always the actual general election. Sure, plenty of scorn will get heaped on them but I doubt even the Democratic appointees would object to this scenario.
So that my friends is how SCOTUS can dodge this particular bullet. Two of them actually. Just STFU on the criminal immunity issue and let the appellate ruling stand. And then when (as is likely) Trump gets convicted drop the 14th Amendment hammer on him. Should things play out that way stock up on popcorn and beer (or whatever beverage you enjoy) and set your DVRs because the GOP convention will be the “Mother of all SH*t Shows!” And if you think what happened in Chicago in 1968 was bad, the clashes between the MAGA Forever types and the “We’ve got to move on” types will make all that look like a love fest.
But it will be great TV, and maybe soothe some of the butt-hurt in the executive suites of news outlets who’ve lusted for a ratings buster like they had in 2016. The sky is the limit on what they’d be able to charge corporations to have their logos (along with a banner a certain number of times during a given hour of coverage running across the bottom of the screen – a “coverage brought to you by” thing) during it all. They will still make a f**kton of money.
Anyway, that’s how I think this might all play out. If I’m wrong? Well, it sure as hell won’t be the first time but I think I’m on to something. Time will tell.
(FYI, if you’re into legal stuff this link to CNN provides you the actual motion Trump filed asking SCOTUS to take up the case. )
seems to me as a matter of law that states are the ones who run their elections and so the top election official in each state should qualify or disqualify candidates for ballots in that state.
Not being a lawyer, I sort of wonder what part of Section 3, where it states categorically that only a 2/3 vote of Congress can overrule a ban on a candidate means that any court (including the Supreme Court) can overrule that
I hope that, like in Chicago 1968 (I was there for that), the police use tear gas on all the crowds that the top dogs disapprove of.
In Chicago, it was the crowds of ‘hippies’ gathered in the parks, doing nothing (mostly) but hippie things, music, weed, free love etm. I hope that this time it is the other side. The crowds that want justice to be ignored, allowing their dictator unbridles entrance to the destruction of our Democracy.
I was at NTC Great Lakes in Boilerman school. a short distance away from Chicago on the commuter trains. A quick train ride, a change of clothes and an explanation of why we had short hair, not because we were narcs, but just wanting to hang out with non military types for a while. Nam was going on and some in the military seemed the tiniest bit rabid.