Posted on 01/06/2024 2:03:17 PM PST by Impala64ssa
Judge J. Michael Luttig speaks to Ali Velshi about the Supreme Court’s decision to take up the question of Trump’s eligibility and why he believes it will be “one of the most consequential Supreme Court decisions since the founding of the nation.” He also explains what many Americans get wrong about the case and what he expects the outcome of the Supreme Court’s decision to be. “The Supreme Court does not want to decide this case and they will likely look for every legitimate way possible to avoid deciding whether the former president is disqualified from the presidency. But there are very, very few, if any, off ramps that would allow the Supreme Court to avoid decision in this case. Indeed, I believe there are none. Section 3 of the Constitution simply couldn't be any clearer."
His track record is pretty good, but this is nuts!
Conservative judge my aye! Arrrggg!
The rest of us peasants have to wait for 20-35 years for satisfaction.
He's Elite. Beasley chose poorly, or he'd still be alive.
“Judge J. Michael Luttig” testified for the prosecution in the J-6 trial.
Well the definition of an insurrection is trying to overthrow the Govt right..well, Trump was President til Jan 20th, so on Jan 6th Trump himself was President..so if Trump was attempting to do an insurrection it means he was trying to overthrow..HIMSELF which is IMPOSSIBLE..also, if they says that Trump was trying to make sure the electors dont validate Biden’s “Win” well lets pretend that is the case, if that were true it was totally unnecessary because Trump didnt need to do any of that..he could have just sat his butt in the White House and said “Im not leaving, the election was stolen from me Im not leaving” so what are they gonna do, bring in SWAT to get rid of him..I would have loved to see them try..so all this insurrection garbage is in fact GARBAGE because Trump didnt need to do any of it
With the talk years ago of him on the SCOTUS, I feel about the same as I do about Garland...we dodged a bullet.
If Trump is the defendant, he’s GUILTY!
If you are correct that the disability was removed in perpetuity that covers President Trump, there is still the fact that it was an act of Congress and not a ratified amendment that removed the disability. The language still exists in the amendment.
No Congress can bind a future Congress. Yes, a prior Congress voted to remove the disability "from all persons whomsoever," but a future Congress can remove that removal by passing a new law reinstating that part of the 14th amendment, or asserting that any removals are temporal only to the cases at hand.
The only way to remove the disability forever out of reach of future Congresses is to ratify a new amendment removing section 3 of the 14th amendment.
That said, how it affects President Trump is debatable. One argument can be made that the amnesty act that you reference is forward-reaching that covers Trump and that moots the issue right then and there. The other argument is that the lack of a time limit in the language was assumed to be for all people living at the time because future Congresses have the power to decide future cases for themselves.
In either case, my proposed plan would allow those arguments to take place, but within a 20th amendment framework and not a 14th amendment framework. "Ripeness" is the key, because arguing it now is premature since so many future events have to happen before Trump gets anywhere near a Presidential inauguration.
-PJ
Is Luttig suffering from senile dementia? Or does Trump derangement syndrome have the same symptoms?
I don't think he is basing anything on president Trump having committed "treason."
OK, I get it.
They’re not going to show there was an actual insurrection, but they are going to use that to keep Trump off the ballot.
Sort of like the old “lack of standing” judicial gambit.
.
MSNBC Hack who’s spent too much time at Pence’s house:
What a joke. No doubt Paid cash from black budget. Strange relationship with Pence.
This guy couldn’t file a motion without 30 grad students.
Certainly a perspective I guess, but no way that’s a sound legal argument.
Unfortunately for these scumbags, at the SC level, they will need to actually have an insurrection to rely on and they dont.
This is just like all the pre-election polls setting up a “close” race so that when it’s stolen it won’t seem to be an aberration. The deep state starts a false narrative very early, it’s supported by their propaganda agencies (the mainstream media”, and then hammered incessantly into the public’s consciousness as being true. They’ve already set up Justice Clarence Thomas as the appointed “fall guy” for the Court’s ruling. It will be really surprising if it’s not a 5-4 decision as so many in the Judiciary are compromised either by ideology or past transgressions. Corruption is now the norm as opposed to the exception.
“No Congress can bind a future Congress.”
You really think that all laws only last until a Congressional session expires?
This guy isn’t a “Conservative”. He’s a Neocon nutjob who was head of the office of legal counsel during the Bush administration. He’s the one who sent out memos saying Torture is OK.
The Neocons don’t like Trump for refusing to go along with their endless wars.
I still think its gonna be a solid 9-0 at the most it will be 8-1 no way is Trump kept off the ballot because that would mean that so can biden, for ANY reason, and neither candidate will get 270 so then what
Yeah, especially Juan Williams, who lays it on thick.
Just remember..Kavanaugh has deep ties to the Bushes. He met his wife in the Bush White House after all. I say there is a 45% chance the SC will rule against Trump.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.