SCOTUS Takes Up the Trump Insurrection Ballot Ban Case

They're taking up the Colorado case - and their ruling will almost certainly apply to other state rulings as well (such as Maine).

What do I think SHOULD happen?

Trump should be barred from ever serving in federal office again.

What I think WILL happen? The Roberts Court has been pretty spineless. Remember how it decided ObamaCare? By twisting the meaning of the individual mandate as a "tax" instead of a requirement to purchase a product from a business.

So I believe that SCOTUS will avoid the Colorado ruling that the prohibition on holding federal office under the insurrection clause of the 14th Amendment applies to the president and vice president (as "officeholders), as well as avoiding the Colorado ruling that Donald Trump did indeed take an oath to uphold the Constitution despite the word play defense his lawyers offered.

What they will do is allow Trump to remain on the ballot by saying Trump hasn't (yet) been convicted of insurrection (never mind that he gave support to those that did), perhaps kicking the can to Congress for that interpretation.

The Court knows there isn't time for such a criminal conviction of Trump to happen before the election and they know a divided Congress won't be able to do anything either.

Do they feel Trump is a danger to democracy? No doubt they do. But they will figure, like the Court did with ObamaCare, the next election will decide it, one way or the other, and make everything about Trump mute, one way or the other.

The problem with that is that if Trump were to win, it may be the LAST free election we will have.

LeopoldBloom · M

While I don't want Trump to hold office again, I'm not sure we want to set a precedent where 9 unelected judges (actually just 5) can decide if a candidate should be disqualified. That being said, this court hasn't exactly done Trump's bidding. They didn't help him with his election challenges. So it's possible they will uphold the Colorado decision.

Trump's strongest argument will be that Jan. 6 wasn't an "insurrection." The amendment clearly applied to the Confederates who were disqualified after the Civil War, but that event was a lot bigger than Jan. 6. On the other hand, Couy Griffin was disqualified for his own role on Jan. 6, so there's a precedent for calling it an insurrection (not that this court cares about precedent). Griffin was convicted of a crime, but that's not required as the former Confederates were not only not convicted of any crime, they weren't even charged with one. So the amendment is self-executing.

LeopoldBloom · M

@Strictgram His team proposed cancelling the remaining Republican primaries, but backed down. I thought they already missed the deadline for getting him onto the Montana primary ballot, not like he'll need it.

BohemianBabe · M

Something I always loved about America is that our institutions were set up specifically so that our democracy couldn't be threatened. Sure, it was never perfect, but we continued making improvement consistently. Now I see that we didn't come nearly close enough. Trump is the archetype of a wannabe-dictator with full control of a major political party, who already tried to end democracy. He shouldn't be allowed to run for president again. And yet, he's going to be the nominee.