I've heard a lot of prognostications that the Supreme Court will find some procedural justification to ignore the 14th Amendment and keep Trump on the ballot. That probably means they will ignore whether or not Trump is an insurrectionist.
If they do find some way to keep Trump on the ballot, maybe we can at least put to rest the farce that conservative justices are textualists and believe in originalism.
If they allow him on the ballot for some weak procedural issue, is it to much to ask them as individuals to state whether are not he is an insurrectionist as defined by the 14th Amendment?
The 14th Amendment does not require a jury trial or proof beyond a reasonable doubt. If they leave Trump on the ballot, every voter will have to decide whether or not Trump engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States or gave aid or comfort to someone who did.
As justices of the United States Supreme Court they have sworn to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Their legal training, experience and oath to the Constitution should demand that they state clearly whether or not they believe that by the text of the 14th Amendment Trump is an insurrectionist or gave aid or comfort to an insurrectionist.
This issue it before the court and they swore an oath to defend the Constitution. If they can't say if he is or is not an insurrectionist, what good are they?
No comments:
Post a Comment