ALAN DERSHOWITZ: Colorado's unconstitutional anti-Trump judicial power grab will trigger Republican retaliation and plunge the 2024 election into chaos
ALAN DERSHOWITZ: Colorado's unconstitutional anti-Trump judicial power grab will trigger Republican retaliation and plunge the 2024 election into chaos
The decision by the all-Democrat Supreme Court of Colorado to remove Donald Trump from the ballot is among the most undemocratic and unconstitutional rulings that I have ever read in my 60 years of teaching and practicing law. The 4-3 judgment purports to derive its authority from Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which was enacted after the Civil War. The measures were designed to prevent individuals who had engaged in the insurrection and rebellion of 1861-1864 from running for certain political offices.
For the Colorado Supreme Court to even consider making this kind of ruling that I believe is a clear bastardization of the Constitution is signature significant as to how far the USA has slid down the slippery slope into totalitarianism. The political left is intentionally poking the bear to see what they can get away with.
I think this ruling from the Colorado Supreme Court is a sign of really bad things yet to come.
Cheating. I witnessed first hand the cheat in Maricopa County AZ. If you question our results, and think the election was not rigged, it's time to open your eyes and realize the cheat.
Trump effectively led a violent attack upon the U.S. Congress with the specific purpose of overturning a fully legal election. At the least we can hopefully agree he sat on his ass for hours watching the violent attack unfold on TV while doing nothing, a blatant violation of his oath to defend the country.
That's who damaged American democracy and violated our constitution. That's who plunged the country in to chaos. Don't over think it.
Wow, what distorted loony toon planet do you live on? An anti-democratic and fascist attempt to prevent someone from running for president based on nothing, is OK by your standard? If anybody is violating democracy and the constitution, it is the Colorado Supreme Court. Of course, Hillary who is still claiming the 2016 election that was stolen from her, and in concert with the DNC attempted to impeach Trump on a bogus "Russian Collusion" hoax is not an attempt at insurrection? I suspect you don't think much....
Did you see any films of police firing less than lethal pepper balls at the heads of protestors. In the policy and procedure of any department, the head is a red (can and will cause fatality) area. This, combined with “cooking” flash bangs and tossing them to explode at head level. I find it far too convenient how a one sided Democrat led investigation skirted the whole subject...which when watched in a live stream, can be seen to enrage the crowd. That was the turning point that people started from protest to violence. If you want to see what happened, ask for all the evidence, not just what media wanted introduced into evidence.
What gave the investigative authorities the right to destroy evidence in said investigation? Would you not see this as a total conflict of interest if you wanted an outside investigation? That can no longer occur, as all of the evidence is no longer available, which IMO is far too convenient. Now, without all evidence, it will be written in the annals as the view that is the view of the chosen. That is not freedom...that is totalitarianism, a system that a true democratic society fights against.
The mark of a democracy is that the people choose their leaders through election. Those leaders gain their just powers by the election of the people, by the people, and for the people. In no way can a state court intervene with the electorate’s right, their only right in their governance.
The 14th amendment says if someone is suspected in participating in an insurrection or aided and abetted an insurrection he cannot run. Yes you are right. But this amendment is in our Constitution. And don't forget States run the Federal election for President. Which means the Supreme Court has no standing in these cases.
Being suspected of any wrongdoing is a low bar. That is why the Amendment states that one has to have committed the act of Insurrection, which is armed rebellion. That occurred in 1861-65. Many officers who fought for the South could only receive their positions back who fought against the US, by Congressional approval. 14A Section 3 does not name the President, but only Electors of the President and VP who require Congressional approval to regain office.
State Legislatures determine the time, place, and manner of Presidential elections, and make the decisions statutory. The job belongs to the Legislature, not the Secretary of State, who is appointed, not elected by the citizenry.
So, decisions made 100+ years ago don't hold now? Then let's NOT assume that the right to bear a musket equates to a right to bear military assault weapons or any firearm that operates with bullets instead of gunpowder. Got it?
I do not think Congress back then anticipated the use of this statute to be extended to those who had demonstrably not committed an act of insurrection, nor have been charged with that crime.
Nor, when they explicitly assigned the power of enforcement to themselves, did they equate state courts with the U.S. Congress.
Peg, that’s not the case here. It’s apples and oranges. If you’ll read Mr Derchowitz’ article there are several reasons why the 14th amendment does not apply here. It has little to do with the age of the statute.
For the Colorado Supreme Court to even consider making this kind of ruling that I believe is a clear bastardization of the Constitution is signature significant as to how far the USA has slid down the slippery slope into totalitarianism. The political left is intentionally poking the bear to see what they can get away with.
I think this ruling from the Colorado Supreme Court is a sign of really bad things yet to come.
Not only has Trump not been convicted of insurrection, he has not been charged with that crime in the first place.
So the Colorado court holds itself as investigator, prosecutor, judge, and jury, so far as the state's citizens are concerned, in one fell swoop.
Or, as Rev. Spooner put it, in one swell foop.
This is what it's like to live in a alternate reality..
Thank you Professor...i learned a few new things.....peace.
I know Babylon Bee. Its a parody account. This is a serious matter. This is not funny Alan is off his meds again.
???
VIRGINIA ROBERTS
Six Republicans made the action to bring it to the Colorado State Supreme Court
Rinos' rule!
Elections are chaos. Have been since 2020.
Cheating. I witnessed first hand the cheat in Maricopa County AZ. If you question our results, and think the election was not rigged, it's time to open your eyes and realize the cheat.
Trump effectively led a violent attack upon the U.S. Congress with the specific purpose of overturning a fully legal election. At the least we can hopefully agree he sat on his ass for hours watching the violent attack unfold on TV while doing nothing, a blatant violation of his oath to defend the country.
That's who damaged American democracy and violated our constitution. That's who plunged the country in to chaos. Don't over think it.
Wow, what distorted loony toon planet do you live on? An anti-democratic and fascist attempt to prevent someone from running for president based on nothing, is OK by your standard? If anybody is violating democracy and the constitution, it is the Colorado Supreme Court. Of course, Hillary who is still claiming the 2016 election that was stolen from her, and in concert with the DNC attempted to impeach Trump on a bogus "Russian Collusion" hoax is not an attempt at insurrection? I suspect you don't think much....
“Peacefully let them know you are displeased”. Clearly a call for overturning the government.
Did you see any films of police firing less than lethal pepper balls at the heads of protestors. In the policy and procedure of any department, the head is a red (can and will cause fatality) area. This, combined with “cooking” flash bangs and tossing them to explode at head level. I find it far too convenient how a one sided Democrat led investigation skirted the whole subject...which when watched in a live stream, can be seen to enrage the crowd. That was the turning point that people started from protest to violence. If you want to see what happened, ask for all the evidence, not just what media wanted introduced into evidence.
What gave the investigative authorities the right to destroy evidence in said investigation? Would you not see this as a total conflict of interest if you wanted an outside investigation? That can no longer occur, as all of the evidence is no longer available, which IMO is far too convenient. Now, without all evidence, it will be written in the annals as the view that is the view of the chosen. That is not freedom...that is totalitarianism, a system that a true democratic society fights against.
Note it was 6 Republicans that completed the action. This not political this is to stop a clear and present danger to our Democracy
This is supposed to be parody. Congrats. https://babylonbee.com/news/colorado-saves-democracy-by-not-allowing-people-to-vote-for-preferred-candidate
Which 6 republicans? The Colorado Supreme Court is 7 Democrats
The mark of a democracy is that the people choose their leaders through election. Those leaders gain their just powers by the election of the people, by the people, and for the people. In no way can a state court intervene with the electorate’s right, their only right in their governance.
The 14th amendment says if someone is suspected in participating in an insurrection or aided and abetted an insurrection he cannot run. Yes you are right. But this amendment is in our Constitution. And don't forget States run the Federal election for President. Which means the Supreme Court has no standing in these cases.
Being suspected of any wrongdoing is a low bar. That is why the Amendment states that one has to have committed the act of Insurrection, which is armed rebellion. That occurred in 1861-65. Many officers who fought for the South could only receive their positions back who fought against the US, by Congressional approval. 14A Section 3 does not name the President, but only Electors of the President and VP who require Congressional approval to regain office.
State Legislatures determine the time, place, and manner of Presidential elections, and make the decisions statutory. The job belongs to the Legislature, not the Secretary of State, who is appointed, not elected by the citizenry.
Might be time for both parties to put up reasonable persons for consideration. Someone we can all get behind. Sigh.
So, decisions made 100+ years ago don't hold now? Then let's NOT assume that the right to bear a musket equates to a right to bear military assault weapons or any firearm that operates with bullets instead of gunpowder. Got it?
I do not think Congress back then anticipated the use of this statute to be extended to those who had demonstrably not committed an act of insurrection, nor have been charged with that crime.
Nor, when they explicitly assigned the power of enforcement to themselves, did they equate state courts with the U.S. Congress.
Peg, that’s not the case here. It’s apples and oranges. If you’ll read Mr Derchowitz’ article there are several reasons why the 14th amendment does not apply here. It has little to do with the age of the statute.
No, idiot. That's not the argument.
Jeff. Don’t call people “idiot”.
OK prig.
Or am I also not allowed to call you a prig?
You can, but it makes you sound like a cottonheaded ninnymuggins. Being cogent points to the conversation or be ignored.
Let me know when Peg is persuaded by your polite comment.