Two wrongs don’t make a right, but two Wrights made an airplane
You know, it was funny when it was just a couple of spoilsport Democratic congressmen and a handful of liberal constitutional scholars raising the alarm about Traitor Tot not being qualified to run for president under Act 3 of the 14th Amendment, the Reconstruction era anti sedition law. It got quite a bit of good natured play in the MSM, almost whimsical.
It’s not so funny anymore. It started out with liberal constitutional scholars like Lawrence Tribe, and congressman Jamie Raskin. The teaser that held the whole thing together was the fact that the Amendment was specific, you don’t have to be convicted of sedition, you just have to be proven to have offered support, aid, or comfort to participants in a seditious act against the United States. Which fits His Lowness to a T.
It stopped being funny when all of a sudden, leading conservative constitutional scholars started coming out in favor of the scheme. Former federal judge and constitutional scholar J. Michael Luttig, the Lawrence Tribe of constitutional scholars found that FrankenTrump was definitely ineligible to run again under the 14th Amendment. And recently, in a legal opinion article, two of the leading conservative shining constitutional stars of The Federalist Society, you know, the GOP’s judicial version of The Handmaids Tale concluded that by any definition of the 14th Amendment, Trump was excluded from being able to run again.
Pure and simple, this has gone too far. It has gotten too much air time, there has been too much serious discussion on the air, and too many people support it for the GOP to be able to put this genie back in the bottle. And the battle is sure to ensue, simply because of the mechanics of starting it in the first place.
In any state, the ultimate arbiter of who is legally entitled to either be, or not be on the ballot is the Secretary of State. And right now there are at least three Democratic Secretaries of State seriously examining whether or not Trump is eligible to be on the ballot due to the 14th Amendment. And you know what? It doesn’t really matter what they decide, because it’s going to court no matter what.
Let’s just say that a Secretary of State determines that Trump is ineligible under the 14th Amendment, and omits his name from the ballot. Trump’s legal carp will immediately file a lawsuit in federal court, demanding Trump’s name be put back on the ballot, and claiming a partisan political witch hunt. Final destination? SCOTUS.
Now, let’s look at it from the other side. Let’s say a Secretary of State qualifies Trump and leaves his name on the ballot. Immediately, a group, likely a bipartisan group of legal experts and constitutional scholars will file a lawsuit in federal court, this time demanding the removal of Trump’s name from the ballot under Act 3 of the 14th Amendment. Once again, final destination? SCOTUS.
So any way you look at it, this mess is ending up in front of the Supreme Court. Which, with a 6-3 GOP super majority, with three justices appointed by Trump, looks like a piss poor arena for getting a righteous judgement. But not so fast. For a couple of reasons.
First, other than overturning Roe v Wade, which was a purely ideological labor of love for the court, the Supreme Court has been anything but kind to El Pendejo Presidente. Repeatedly during his term they ruled that his hare brained proclamations were unconstitutional. They ordered his accounting firm to turn his accounting and tax records over to the Manhattan Da. They ordered him to appear at deposition. and they repeatedly either struck down, or refused to hear his emergency injunction requests when he was fighting the 2020 election results in court.
Second on the hit parade is Trump himself. Right from the get go, Trump proudly referred to the Evil Axis as His Justices. Like they were chattel property. Gorsuch can’t be proud that he got his seat because Mitch McConnell literally stole it from Merrick Garland. Brewski Brett Kavanaugh can’t be proud that Trump brought out his sexual predator behavior and drinking problem at his hearings, and that he demeaned himself into a pathetic, tearful rant to get his job. And Amy Coney Barrett can’t help but wonder, Why Me? And I think that a small, petty personal part of them takes great pleasure in sticking their decisions up Trump’s fat *ss, just to prove their independence.
The minute the lawsuit(s), any lawsuits get filed, Trump is immediately going to run to Bullsh*t Social to proudly proclaim to his supporters that His Supreme Court Justices will get this sh*t fixed up most riki-tik. Which is a scenario that should give Chief Justice John Roberts nocturnal emissions.
Right now, the Roberts court has lower popularity with Americans than dog sh*t. After all, dog sh*t is at least funny if somebody gets it on their shoe. There’s nothing funny about the Roberts court. Clarence Thomas is Ken Paxton in a black robe, and right now Roberts wishes he would befall the same fate. Alito needs to get his vocal chords cut, and the Dobbs decision ensured that Roberts will go down in history as the first Chief Justice to actually remove a constitutional right from over half the population. This case is a lifeline for Roberts and his reputation.
And it almost sells itself to the Axis of Evil on his court. If the court votes that Traitor Tot can remain on the ballot, then they risk having Trump win in November. This means either whoring themselves constantly to please Glorious Bleater, or face death threats from enraged Trombies when they defy him. And all while Trump is scheming to make the Supreme Court a mere rubber stamp for his desires.
But if they side with the angels, and give Trump the Denver Boot, their problems are solved. While Roberts, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett are to some degree ideologically driven, I can’t believe that they don’t fundamentally believe in the constitution. After all, they spent their careers defining and defending it, with no guarantee they would get where they are. And Trump wants to demolish it. If they invalidate Trump’s ability to run, he’s toast. Just another scumbag in an orange jumpsuit. Roberts’s court gets an immediate popularity boost for finally following the law for once, and none of the Axis of Evil ever have to hear themselves referred to as Trump’s Justices.
Man! That’s a whole ton of political bullsh*t right there. And justice is supposed to be above politics, right? Dream on. Every Supreme Court justice has been, from the start ideological enough to be thought of as either conservative or liberal. But you know what they all share in common? They all had to be good enough jurists to compile a ruling record that showed their expertise for the law, or they likely would not have survived their confirmation. Brewski Brett excluded. And they’re all smart enough, Alito and Thomas excluded, to realize that sometimes a sound legal decision also just happens to be the best political decision.Â
But make no mistake, this case is coming to the Supreme Court one way or the other. And here’s a prediction. As with Bush v Gore in 2000, Roberts is not going to want to wait while the appellate process plays out. Once the initial ruling is made, I look for Roberts to immediately take the case on an expedited basis, to minimize the disruption to the general electoral process, and ensure confidence in the integrity of the election. We’ll see how it goes from there.
I don’t think SCROTUS wants this case at all. Roberts is probably hoping the cases in district and circuit courts all reach the same resolution. If there is no split with the Circuits, they don’t have anything to resolve and can just refuse to hear it. But knowing how skewed some of the Circuits are, there is likely to be a difference in results. These cases are likely to be expedited, due to the election. But last election year, they refused to hear a redistricting case in Feb (the primary wasn’t until August) because it was too close to the election. So, while your argument is logical and reasonable, this SCROTUS has proved they are not. And if they thought they were getting death threats after Dobbs, just wait until the MAGAts hear they ruled against Cheeto Jesus.
A split between Circuits doesn’t necessarily mean SCOTUS will step in. There’s no Constitutional requirement or even law that compels them to do so. It’s assumed, correctly (and wisely) that if there’s a split between Circuits on a specific matter SCOTUS will in fact take it on to resolve it so as to have a consistent legal standard across the land. However, there have been times when they have not done so and so a different set of laws/rules on some matters does in fact exist depending on which of the 13 Circuits people live in or companies are headquartered. It can be a nightmare and this sure as hell would be. Roberts has probably been losing a lot of sleep at night over this. I’d imagine he’s not the only one.
And it’s all because McConnell wouldn’t free up the GOPers in the Senate to do what enough of them would have done which was to convict Trump during one of his impeachments. Had that happened we wouldn’t be having this discussion. Trump would have been done politically and that would have been that. The GOP might have taken a hit for ONE election cycle but frankly I don’t think it would have been as bad as they feared. They’d have gained some traction with Independent voters and there are more Independents registered than there are Democrats or Republicans! Oh well. I’m still of the mind SCOTUS (most of them) want no part of this.
Not a really useful data point, but Aaron Burr (former vice president) was brought up on treason charges for trying to foment a rebellion in the new territories of New Orleans and Mexico. He was put on trial before chief justice John Marshall and was found not guilty because there was not enough evidence. This was all prior to the 14th amendment. I guess my point is that we have prosecuted high level people for treason in the past, what is so unprecedented about what is happening now?
The crunch is at the end of 14.3 which, effectively, takes it out of the USSC ambit – it specifies that it takes a 2/3 majority in BOTH houses of Congress to put him back on the poll list.
If even one State refuses to allow him to stand, then the ball is kicked to Congress at that point – not the courts (and the chances of him obtaining a 2/3 ‘not guilty’ vote in both Houses is, to put it mildly, about as likely as a blizzard in the Sahara)
Should this go to court (s) and trump not get his name on the ballots of umpty-squat number of states, there is always a write-in spot and I’m guessing his cult A) can at least spell his name and B) will put him on the ballot that way. What then? What would happen if he received more write-in votes than the republican actually on the ballot?
They might be able to spell,
but they are mostly overweight slovenly and lazy people .
Look at almost every traitor who has been convicted so far.
They won’t even make the effort.
I agree with the Murfster. Last week, I wrote an article laying out the irrefutable facts that state secretaries can assert to support a disqualification of Trump under the 14th Amendment. Yes, the Supreme Court may want to avoid having to make a decision, but I don’t believe they will have a choice.
We will have no democracy if Trump is reelected. There will be no Constitution, no independent three branches of government and no critical checks and balances necessary to our democracy.
The Trump/Moscow Mitch cramdown of conservatives who lied under oath to get their life-time jobs have shown Trump intolerance, as Murf rightly points out. I believe the majority of Justices still believe that saving our Constitution and democratic freedom must be affirmed.
Put another way, quoting Mel Brooks, “Gentlemen, we’ve got to save our phony-baloney jobs.”
Tip Jar. Only a quote from Mel Brooks keeps this in perspective. LMAO…