Trump V Anderson Supreme Court Case

Trump V Anderson Supreme Court Case Demonstrates A Bitterly Divided Court!

admin 5 Comments

The right wing Supreme Court has determined that Donald Trump cannot be barred from Presidential primary ballots, despite many conservatives, including former Circuit Court Judge J. Michael Luttig among many others, stating that his inciting of the US Capitol Insurrection of January 6, 2021 violated the 14th Amendment, Section Three.

The decision was that it is up to Congress to bar anyone from running for President, not individual state governments.

In so doing, the decision demonstrated a bitterly divided Court, as the four women on the Court, three Democrats and Justice Amy Coney Barrett, while part of an unanimous vote, made clear their discomfort with the issue of Donald Trump being able to avoid responsibility for his actions on January 6.

If Trump had been removed from the ballot in Colorado, Maine and Illinois, it would have led to further incitement by Trump on the basis that he was being denied the right to be judged by the American people.

So the understanding is that ultimately it is up to the American people and their voting to repudiate this Insurrectionist by reelecting Joe Biden in November!

The Supreme Court has lost all credibility, and its public opinion rating is an all time low, with particularly two of its members—Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito—being seen as corrupt and personally obnoxious—and the Court being the most right wing since the early 1930s.

It Looks Like Donald Trump Will Remain On The Ballot: Time For A Vigorous, No Holds Barred Campaign!

admin 1 Comment

After witnessing the oral arguments before the Supreme Court yesterday in the Trump V Anderson Colorado Ballot controversy, it looks like Donald Trump will remain on the ballot for the Presidential Election of 2024 in all of the 50 states.

It was quite surprising even seeing the liberal Democratic appointments on the Supreme Court, and particularly Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, seemingly skeptical on the matter, although Sonia Sotomayor seemed likely to be in dissent.

It was also quite amazing that Clarence Thomas did not recuse himself on the matter, considering that his wife Ginni Thomas was supportive of the US Capitol Insurrection, but then it is well recognized that Thomas has no ethics, morals, or scruples.

Any time that the Supreme Court is involved in oral argument can lead to speculation on the result, so there could be a surprise decision, but it is clear one should not bet on it.

So it is now time for a vigorous, no holds barred campaign for the next nine months, as American democracy and the rule of law is on trial, in what can be considered the most dangerous times since the Civil War 160 years ago!

Distinguished Group Of 25 Historians Advocating Removal Of Donald Trump Presidential Candidacy Under 14th Amendment Section Three Of The Constitution

admin 4 Comments

The upcoming Supreme Court case regarding whether Donald Trump should be removed from ballots in Colorado and nationwide for the Presidential Election of 2024 will be argued this Thursday, and a distinguished group of 25 historians has submitted briefs supporting Colorado in the case Trump V Anderson.

Among the reputable historians giving views supportive of such action are:

Allan J. Lichtman of American University
Nell Irvin Painter of Princeton University
James McPherson of Princeton University
Thomas C. Holt of the University of Chicago
Brooks D. Simpson of Arizona State University
Lawrence Powell of Tulane University
Peter C. Hoffer of University of Georgia
Steve Hahn of New York University

There are a multitude of conservative thinkers and authors who also believe Trump inspired the 2021 US Capitol Insurrection, and should be banned under the 14th Amendment Section 3.

The question is whether the conservative dominated US Supreme Court will follow through on their beliefs in “Textualism” and “Originalism”, or whether they will demonstrate their hypocrisy, with most observers thinking the latter will happen!

The reputation of the Court as an institution, and of its nine members, is at stake.

Associate Justice Clarence Thomas should recuse himself in this case, since his wife was involved in the Insurrection.

And Chief Justice John Roberts should want his Court to be seen in history as reputable!

Earlier Courts unanimously repudiated Richard Nixon in US V Nixon (1974), and Bill Clinton in Clinton V Jones (1997), so the present Court has a heavy burden to deal with for history!