LIVE UPDATES: Supreme Court hears historic Trump 14th Amendment case

LIVE UPDATES: Supreme Court hears historic Trump 14th Amendment case

Colorado Solicitor General Shannon Stevenson is now representing Secretary of State Jenna Griswold. She is making the case that Colorado has the power under state election code to disqualify candidates who are ineligible to hold the office they seek.

He said in his inauguration, “There is nothing in the Constitution that deprives the states of the power to direct presidential elections in this manner.” “This case was handled competently and efficiently by the Colorado courts under the process we have used for more than a century to decide ballot changes. And as everyone agrees, the court now has That is the record that is needed to resolve these important issues.”

Justice Brett Kavanaugh asked whether the high court should think about democracy when interpreting Section 3, specifically the right of the people to elect candidates of their choice.

In a lengthy response, Murray passionately argued that the issue was central to the defense of democracy.

Read Also:  Which Are The Most Dangerous Areas In New York According To Artificial Intelligence

“Constitutional safeguards are aimed at protecting our democracy, not just for the next election cycle but for generations to come,” he said. “And second, Section 3 is designed to protect our democracy in the same way. The framers of Section 3 knew from painful experience that those who had violently broken their oath to the Constitution would be barred from assuming power again. cannot be trusted because they could destroy our constitutional democracy from within.”

He added, “President Trump can ask Congress to pardon him by a two-thirds vote, but until he does, our Constitution protects us from insurrectionists.”

“This case shows the danger of refusing to invoke Section 3 as written because the reason we are here is because President Trump tried to disenfranchise the 80 million Americans who voted against him and The Constitution does not require that he be given another chance.”

Read Also:  USA: A Republican lawmaker wants to impeach Biden

Anti-Trump protesters protest outside the US Supreme Court as the court considers whether former President Donald Trump is eligible to run for president in the 2024 election, in Washington, February 8, 2024. Roberto Schmidt/AFP via Getty Images

Justice Samuel Alito pressed Murray on what the U.S. Supreme Court should do if different states render different rulings on Trump’s conduct based on different sets of evidence or standards of proof.

“Do we have to decide what the appropriate standard of proof is?” Alito asked. “Shall we give any deference to these findings by state court judges, some of whom may be elected? Shall we have to conduct our own tests?”

Murray said, “No, Your Honor, this court takes the evidentiary record as it is.” “And here we have an evidentiary record that all parties agree is sufficient for a decision in this case.”

Read Also:  The "Curse" of July 4th: US Presidents Who Died on Independence Day
Chief Justice John Roberts said, “It seems clear to me that if Colorado’s position is upheld, there will certainly be disqualification proceedings on the other side and some of them will be successful.”

“The fact that there is a potentially frivolous application of a constitutional provision is no reason to…,” Murray began to respond, before Roberts cut him off.

“You may think they’re trivial, I think the people who are bringing them in won’t think they’re trivial,” Roberts said. “Insurrection is a broad, broad term and there is some debate about it.”

“There’s a reason Section 3 is inactive for 150 and that’s because we haven’t seen anything like January 6 since Reconstruction,” countered Murray.

In this April 23, 2021 file photo, Chief Justice John Roberts sits during a group photo at the Supreme Court in Washington. Erin Schaff/AP, File


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here