Connect with us

News

Here’s What SCOTUS Just Did – and Did Not Do – in Its ‘Unanimous’ Trump Ruling: Experts

Published

on

The U.S. Supreme Court Monday morning handed down a unanimous 9-0 decision determining the State of Colorado cannot kick Donald Trump off the presidential ballot, but legal and constitutional experts caution it’s not quite as unanimous as initial reports state, and there’s a lot the justices did, and did not do, that makes this ruling important, but also, makes some extremely concerned.

First, Trump stays on the 2024 ballot and any other current challenges to his ability to remain on other states ballots are likely, effectively dead.

“It’s a win for Trump,” notes former Obama acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal. “At the same time, remember that the Supreme Court’s decision today did not do what Donald Trump had asked: clear him of insurrection.”

That’s critical.

“The Colorado court found that he so was, and Trump had an entire section of his SCOTUS brief arguing he was peaceful on 1/6,” Katal continues. “The Court didn’t do what he asked; it did not clear him. And the act’s decision leaves space for his criminal trial about Jan 6 to proceed, should the Court dispose of the other Trump immunity case quickly in the Spring (as it can and must).”

READ MORE: ‘All Had Security Clearances’: Trump White House Loaded With Speed, Xanax, and Alcohol – Report

Professor of law and popular MSNBC and NBC News legal contributor Joyce Vance points out that the Court specified Trump is a “former” president, and more importantly, “the Court didn’t say he was not an insurrectionist.”

Noted civil rights and national security journalist Marcy Wheeler quickly responded to the decision, observing that Special Counsel “Jack Smith could — today — charge Trump with inciting insurrection in response to this order.”

“It is,” Wheeler adds, “the one Constitutional means to disqualify him, according to this order.”

Meanwhile, Katyal also notes that the Supreme Court justices “took 25 days to render this decision. Anything longer in the immunity case would be deeply inconsistent with what it did here.”

Many experts pointed to the portion of the Supreme Court’s ruling that found for the 14th Amendment’s declaration that those who have engaged in insurrection cannot hold office can only be decided by Congress — something the 14th Amendment doesn’t specifically state.

NBC News and MSNBC legal analyst Glenn Kirschner, a former federal prosecutor of 30 years, wrote: “Supreme Court rules that an adjudicated insurrection[ist] can still be president, unless Congress acts. Not unexpected, but more proof that our institutions of government are not up to the task of saving American democracy. Once again, it’s up to We The People.”

National security attorney Brad Moss appeared even more vehement than Kirschner. He declared: “This is awesome. Constitutional amendments are meaningless unless Congress acts to enforce them. To hell with the 22nd amendment.”

The 22nd Amendment, ratified in 1951, essentially says you can only be president for two terms, depending one certain situations: “No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.”

READ MORE: Bartiromo Blasts Biden Administration for Encouraging Americans to Register to Vote

(So, if a vice president become president due to the incapacitation, resignation, or death of a president, they could run for president and be elected twice, depending on when they first became President.)

Others pointed to that provision, arguing that former President Barack Obama could in theory serve as president again, unless Congress stops him – based on today’s SCOTUS ruling.

“Anyone have a good point of contact for former President Obama? I have a legal memorandum to send him,” Moss quips.

“Even better,” Moss continues sardonically, “as it just occurred to me: you know that whole requirement in Section 1, Article II of the Constitution, that the president has to be a natural born citizen? Guess what? Absent Congressional action, that provision is meaningless.”

“So under the Court’s legal analysis,” he adds, “if Trump wins but Democrats take the House and hold the Senate, Congress can invalidate Trump’s victory and throw us into chaos? Oh goodie.”

Moss still was not done.

“Here is the craziest part of the majority ruling in the Trump ballot case: it places the burden on federal district attorneys, who are appointed by the incumbent president, to somehow initiate a civil action against the incumbent president for holding office in violation of Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment. That way, madness lies.”

As for that “unanimous” claim, professor of law and former U.S. Attorney and Deputy Assistant Attorney General Harry Litman points out the three liberal justices, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson, “concur on ground that court goes too far in deciding future possible cases. Barrett similarly but more narrowly says court shouldn’t opine that federal legislation the only way to enforce section 3.”

Or, as The New Republic’s Greg Sargent, explains, Kagan, Sotomayor and Jackson, “all dissent from the view that only Congress can disqualify.”

Litman continues to tear apart the “unanimous ruling” claim.

“Court spoke in one voice on result, but on rationale hardly a kumbaya moment. The 5 [conservative justices] restricted future enforcement of §3 of the 14th Am[endment] in ways the other 4 (3 libs + Barrett) felt unnecessary and unwise. And the 3 libs cited Breyer dissent in Bush v Gore–the ultimate bete noire.”

Professor of law Anthony Michael Kreis put it even more succinctly: “Originalism: but only when we like it!”

READ MORE: ‘Injustice’: Experts Condemn Supreme Court’s ‘Fundamentally Corrupt’ Trump Decision

See the social media post above or at this link.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘Pay-to-Play’: Trump Offers ‘Fully Expedited’ Approvals for $1 Billion Investments

Published

4 hours ago

on

December 10, 2024

By

President-elect Donald Trump pledged to fast-track permits and tamp down regulations, including environmental, for any entity that wants to invest $1 billion or more in America, while offering no specifics or parameters, including how the federal government could arbitrarily overrule state and local laws.

“Any person or company investing ONE BILLION DOLLARS, OR MORE, in the United States of America, will receive fully expedited approvals and permits, including, but in no way limited to, all Environmental approvals. GET READY TO ROCK!!!” Trump wrote on his Truth Social website.

During the campaign, Trump told oil and gas executives and lobbyists at a closed-door Mar-a-Lago fundraiser that if they invested $1 billion in his campaign, he would scale back or remove environmental regulations.

READ MORE: ‘Swarm of MAGA Attacks’ Making Hegseth Confirmation Seem More Likely: Report

“Attendees included executives from ExxonMobil, EQT Corporation and the American Petroleum Institute, which lobbies for the oil industry,” The New York Times had reported in May. “The event was organized by the oil billionaire Harold Hamm, who has for years helped to shape Republican energy policies.”

Trump has announced his nominee for Secretary of the Interior will be North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum.

“Under the National Environmental Policy Act,” Forbes reports, “the federal government is required to conduct environmental reviews before approving energy production plans, infrastructure builds and other projects.
​ How Trump will help investors get around regulations isn’t clear, but Trump has vowed to increase domestic production of oil and natural gas, projects that are often stymied or killed in the regulatory process.”

Critics blasted Trump’s statement.

314Action, which says it is “the only organization in the nation focused on recruiting, training, and electing Democrats with a background in science to public office,” wrote: “To tackle the climate crisis, Congress needs to pass and enforce bold, evidence-based legislation. However, Donald Trump doesn’t believe that billionaires should have to follow the law. In his world, they can pay-to-play and bypass crucial environmental protections. That’s why we’ll always fight to #ElectScientists who will fight back against his anti-science agenda and hold these bad actors accountable.”

“A government of oligarchs that will exist to solely serve the interests of oligarchs while distracting working people with culture wars. Foreign corporations & persons can loot & pollute the US and bypass regs that protect the health of Americans as long as they got lots of cash,” observed MeidasTouch editor-in-chief Ron Filipkowski.

Journalist David Leavitt asked, “How many animals will go extinct because of this? How much quicker will this hasten the destruction of our planet?”

READ MORE: Hegseth Successfully Gaslights on Women in ‘Combat’

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

News

‘Swarm of MAGA Attacks’ Making Hegseth Confirmation Seem More Likely: Report

Published

6 hours ago

on

December 10, 2024

By

The Secretary of Defense nomination of Pete Hegseth, the ex-Fox News weekend co-host under a cloud of allegations ranging from sexual assault and sexual harassment to abuse of alcohol to financial mismanagement of two charities, appears to have turned around after several media appearances, and the support from key Republican Senators, especially Joni Ernst, who is being subjected to a “swarm of MAGA attacks,” Politico reports.

Senator Ernst, a combat veteran who sits on the critical Armed Services Committee and initially appeared skeptical about Hegseth running the world’s largest and most lethal military, has opened the door to the possibility of giving him the thumbs up.

Ernst “previously said she wasn’t ready to back Hegseth. But after their second meeting on Monday, she said she’d be ‘supporting him through this process’ — though she would not say whether she would ultimately vote in favor of his confirmation,” ABC News reports.

Meanwhile, Politico reports Ernst’s possibly changed stance may have something to do with the extraordinary pressure she is receiving, thanks to Trump’s transition team and MAGA allies.

READ MORE: Hegseth Successfully Gaslights on Women in ‘Combat’

“In recent days, allies of Trump adopted an approach that is not novel for the president-elect and his followers: Make life extremely uncomfortable for anyone who dares to oppose him. The swarm of MAGA attacks that Sen. Joni Ernst has experienced is a warning of what’s in store for others who express skepticism of his personnel choices.”

Politico adds that “the palpable shift demonstrated how grassroots pressure, combined with the influence of Vice President-elect JD Vance, helped bolster Hegseth only days after Trump was drawing up contingency plans to tap Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis instead.”

“People in Trump’s orbit believed that if Hegseth’s nomination was ‘sacrificed’ to Ernst, it would become a ‘feeding frenzy’ with the president-elect’s other controversial picks.”

Senator Lindsey Graham, who served in the military for decades, on Tuesday appeared dismissive of the numerous allegations against Hegseth, claiming that they were made anonymously. He seemed prepared to afford the nominee the same civil rights as if he were being prosecuted and tried in a court of law, and not a presidential cabinet nominee to head the Pentagon, which has a budget of just under $1 trillion.

“The accusations are anonymous, the police report I’ve read uh, right now, he’s in pretty good shape,” Graham told CNN’s Manu Raju (video below). “I think he’s very smart, I actually was with him in Afghanistan what he’s doing is his duty, I was over there very briefly as a reservist. So, the accusations about mismanaging money and about, um, nonconsensual behavior, if they come forward, I will listen to those accusations, but they have to be credible and they have to be presented in a fashion that Pete can rebut.”

READ MORE: ‘USA Is a Threat’: Canadians Slam ‘Bully’ Trump’s ‘Arrogant’ Mockery of ‘Governor Trudeau’

“So he’s much better off this week than he was last week,” Graham said.

Raju reports there currently are no GOP Senators who have said publicly they absolutely will not vote for Hegseth.

But Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal “says a number of his GOP colleagues are opposed to Pete Hegseth’s nomination to be Defense Secretary,” reports CBS News Congressional Correspondent Scott MacFarlane. “But he says GOP colleagues might still vote for Hegseth because ‘Trump is a bully and a tyrant.'”

Watch below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘I Love His Charisma’: Republican Lauds ‘Man of Integrity’ Hegseth Who Will ‘Get Rid of DEI’

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

‘USA Is a Threat’: Canadians Slam ‘Bully’ Trump’s ‘Arrogant’ Mockery of ‘Governor Trudeau’

Published

11 hours ago

on

December 10, 2024

By

Overnight, President-elect Donald Trump continued his verbal assaults on Canada, America’s largest trading partner and a top defense partner, by calling Prime Minister Justin Trudeau the “Governor” of the “Great State of Canada.” Some Canadians are striking back.

After the November election, Trump announced that one of his first actions would be to impose massive tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China. The President of Mexico fought Trump in the press, explaining that his border demands were nonsensical since Mexico was already doing what he was calling for.

But Prime Minister Trudeau decided to fly down to Mar-a-Lago to negotiate with Trump—who is not yet President—and by doing so, some claim, gave Trump the upper hand.

“It was a pleasure to have dinner the other night with Governor Justin Trudeau of the Great State of Canada,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social website at 12:06 AM Tuesday. “I look forward to seeing the Governor again soon so that we may continue our in depth talks on Tariffs and Trade, the results of which will be truly spectacular for all!”

READ MORE: ‘I Love His Charisma’: Republican Lauds ‘Man of Integrity’ Hegseth Who Will ‘Get Rid of DEI’

During their Mar-a-Lago meeting, Trump reportedly mocked Trudeau to his face with his “51st state” trolling, according to Fox News.

Trump’s midnight move followed Prime Minister Trudeau saying on Monday that Americans “are beginning to wake up to the real reality that tariffs on everything from Canada would make life a lot more expensive,” The Associated Press reported. Trudeau also threatened to retaliate.

Trudeau warned that Trump’s tariffs would “mean real hardship for Americans,” who “import 65% of their crude oil from Canada, [and] significant amounts of electricity. Just about all the natural gas exported from Canada goes to the United States. They rely on us for steel and aluminum. They rely on us for a range of agriculture imports. All of those things would get more expensive.”

Trump last week promoted what appeared to be an AI-generated image of him standing in snow looking out at what was supposedly Canada but was reportedly the Matterhorn, the mountain that borders Switzerland and Italy.

On Sunday Trump falsely claimed on NBC News’ “Meet the Press” that America is “subsidizing Canada to the tune of over $100 billion.” He appeared to be referring to the U.S. trade deficit with Canada, which is not “over $100 billion.” In 2023, it was $67.9 billion. The U.S. economy is about ten times that of Canada, and the U.S. population is about eight times that of Canada.

READ MORE: ‘You Have to’: Trump Confirms Plan to Deport US Citizens With Undocumented Parents

“If we’re going to subsidize them, let them become a state,” Trump angrily declared.

Some in the U.S. suggested Trudeau meeting with Trump may not have been the best move.

“Trudeau running down to Mar-a-Lago right after Trump posted his tariff threat was a huge mistake. Now Trump thinks he owns him. Amazing after all this time so many people still have no clue how to deal with him,” noted MeidasTouch editor-in-chief Ron Filipkowski.

Prime Minister Trudeau “hopping on a flight to mar a lago on back of us tariff threat (correctly) perceived as weakness by president-elect trump,” noted Ian Bremmer, founder of the political risk research and consulting firm Eurasia Group. He added that Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum “has handled this better.”

But critics in the U.S. and Canada are blasting the President-elect.

“Trump’s ‘great state of Canada’ would have cast 20 Senate votes to convict him at his 2021 impeachment trial,” wrote The Atlantic’s David Frum, a former Bush 43 White House speechwriter who reportedly coined the term “axis of evil.”

“Perhaps Trump doesn’t realize that annexing Canada would be handing Democrats control of the House, Senate, and White House … ?” observed The New Yorker’s Susan Glasser.

“Disrespectful trolling of Canada and other countries around the world by Trump is a feature of who the man is, not a bug. The world is an unstable and dangerous enough place,” warned Bruce Anderson, a Canadian pollster and political commentator.

Canadian pundit Laura Babcock also issued a warning, writing, “FFS this is EXACTLY what I warned about on radio: Trump has a proven process of signalling, mocking and normalizing preposterous ideas (Manifest Destiny in this case) so he can weaken resistance to them! It’s how he destroys norms. We need to fight back early and often Canada.”

Former Cabinet Minister and Deputy Premier of Alberta, Canada, Thomas Lukaszuk added, “Referring to Canada as US state and to our Prime Minister as Governor must concern us all. This arogant passive aggressive language shows Trump has no respect for Canada’s sovereignty and the integrity of our borders. Such language is dangerous and can’t be tolerated.”

Canadian journalist Geoffrey Johnston slammed “ignorant bully” Trump, writing, “Canada will never join USA. Time for Canadians to stop thinking of USA as a friend. Under Trump, USA is a threat to Canada’s economy & sovereignty. Most Canadians prefer our cooperative ways to American private medicine, gun violence, & imperialism.”

See the videos and social media posts above or at this link.

READ MORE: Butker’s ‘Traditional Values’ PAC Took Retiree Cash, Spent Most on Fundraising: Report

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.