Transcripts For CSPAN Reaction 20240705

Public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. I would expect that a good number ostates will say, whoeve the democratic candidate is, you are off the ballot, and others, for the republican candidate, you are off the ballot. It will come down to a handful of states that will decide the president ial election. I think the question you will have to confront is why single state who gets to decide who should be president of the united states. Host today at the Supreme Court, the nine justices heard oral argument in a historic case about whether the insurrection clause of the constitution disqualifies former President Donald Trump from appearing on the primary ballot in colorado. Tonight, we want to get your reaction to the case. Yours how you can join the conversation. Republicans, 2027488921. Democrats 2027488920. All other style and that 2027488922. Voters in colorado we want to hear from you at 2027488923. You can also join us on x with the handle at cspan or on facebook. Com cspan. Start dialing and now, we will pick up the conversation in just a minute. We will take it until 8 30 p. M. Eastern time tonight. At that point we will hit the rewriting rewind button and show you the oral argument in its entirety may entirety. At the center of this case is sectn ree of the 14th amendment. Here is the bit from that part of the constitution. No person shall be a in esident and Vice President who prevusly taken an o to support the cotionf the united states, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same. Joining us this evening is mark, a writer who was in the courtroom today. Why does this case center around Section Three of the 14th amendment . Guest good evening. That is the section that the voters in colorado, the group of six voters seized on to try to knock donald trump off the primary ballot there. And, this section has not been used in a president ial election before, but there has been some scholarly work about it. Particularly since last year, in influential law review article was published by two conservatives who urged their coming their conclusion after researching this that this could be done and should be done because they believed that President Trump had engaged in insurrection. So, thats where we are now. Host what were the justices saying . What types of questions were they asking revolving around the 14th amendment, Section Three . Guest its very interesting because this came up kind of quickly and was put on the docket quickly by the court with the belief that they need to address this. Once they did disqualify donald trump, other states had reached the opposite conclusion or not disqualified him on technical reasons. Yet, other states are considering this. So, i think the court felt it was important. There are many complex questions that are embedded in this case. What was clear from the beginning was that the court was not going to engage the basic question, did donald trump engage in insurrection . They were going to work on the margins of some of the other more complicated issues first and last. Host it was one hour before that very question came up. It was asked by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson to the president s lawyer. What is likelihood after listening to more than two hours today, this oral argument, that the former president remains disqualified on the primary ballot in colorado . Guest the likelihood that he remains disqualified is quite low. I certainly agree, and most of my reporter colleagues and others who watched his or listen to it on the live stream agree that thats not where the court is going, and it may well be unanimous, it may well be lopsided, but that is not the direction the court is headed. They will, in some way or another, overturn this Colorado Supreme Court decision. Host how soon could the court make a decision . Guest thats a good question. This case is been compared to bush versus gore, that was the 2000 president ial election. It was close and came down to florida. The court took a wild before it got involved, but then decided it needed to result resolve the theme pretty quickly. Heard arguments one day. It did hear arguments in the separate site issue first. But when they heard bush versus gore, they heard arguments one day and decided the next day. That is not going to happen here. There is not quite that urgency, but i think they will strive to resolve it quickly. We wont be waiting until the end of june. Its more likely to be the march super primary date, super tuesday date that includes colorados primary. Former president is on the ballot while these proceedings this ruling was stayed. But thats one possibility, to try to get it out by them. Host mark walsh, thank you for your time tonight. Now lets turn to all of you and get your thoughts on this Supreme Court case today. Trump v anderson. Those are the lines on your screen. Ed is in belleville, illinois. Lets hear from you first. Caller thank you for taking my call. I found some of Justice Roberts questioning in this oral argument to be almost silly. Suggesting that red states are going to knock democrats off the ticket and blue states are going to do the same, there would have to be proof that the candidate engaged in insurrection or gave aid and comfort before they could do any of that. So is the chief justice suggesting these states will willynilly not follow the law at all and randomly start knocking candidates off the ballots . I think that is a false premise and i dont think i would like to hear how the lawyers answered some of these questions. That was my comment. Host you can do that, certainly. If you go on cspan. Org, you can watch this case in its in its entirety, here the justices asked their questions and hear the lawyer respond. You can find it on our free mobile app, cspan now. Downloaded to our downloaded to your phone. If you dont have time to listen to two hours plus of todays oral argument, go to youtube and on our website you will find cspans short take. Its a compilation of all the key moments, and one of them is that question that chief Justice Roberts asked to the lawyers representing norma anderson, the 90yearold republican, former lawmaker of colorado, and some colorado voters who brought this case before the Supreme Court. Lets go next to suzanne in castle rock, colorado. What do you think should happen here . Hello, can you meet your television . Tell us, as a colorado voter, what do you want to happen in your state . Caller can you hear me . Host yes, we can. Caller i hope they vote 90. Host 90, what . 90, for trump. Host robin, in michigan. Caller hi, can you hear me . Host yes i can. Caller i would like to say, why would it be allowed for any candidate to be removed from a ballot on hearsay, and that former President Trump was never convicted of any crime, so why would they remove his name as candidate from the president ial run when the American People wanted to vote for him . It would be like a slap in the face for the constitution, and wouldnt it be considered tampering with the election . And, i feel that, to me, what would you consider above the law . What would be the definition, as far as, to me come our definition of the law would be to follow the law of the constitution. I feel that their definition would be their law, they are making their own laws as they go along. I just really feel with him not doing a crime, i just feel there is no insurrection. Host we heard that. Just a reminder to you and others, you have to mute your television. We hear you, but we also hear the feedback from your television and it makes it difficult. Reuters legal sending this out about the oral argument. Scotus justices appear skeptical toward a judicial decision taking former President Donald Trump out the ballot in colorado for participating in an insurrection during the 2021 Capitol Attack in a case with major implications in the november election. You also have this, a longtime watcher of the court, often clueless to predict how the Supreme Court would rule on a case, not so today. The trump disqualification case is over. Might even be ending 81, if not, 90. Justices came to the bench with their minds mostly made up. Trump is very likely to stay on the ballot. You have lawrence hurley, who is a legal analyst for nbc writing, the Supreme Court spent two hours weighing whether trump should be kicked off the ballot but barely touched on an issue, was january 6 actually in insurrection . There is also this tweet from stephen sending out this tweet, out of the oral argument, trump is staying on the ballot. In the decision may well be unanimous. And i will end with this from jonathan, a conservative legal analyst at George Washington university, the argument is now over. The disqualification advocates may have expected a cold reception, but this was perfectly glacial. Nobody, some of the toughest and most notably, sorry, some of the toughest and most skeptical questions came from the left of the court. Mira in louisville, tennessee, lets go to you. Please, meet your television. Caller ok. Host now we will listen to you. Caller i am from colorado. I dont think he needs to be on the ballot because i dont think its fair. If he did that on january the sixth, i really dont think he needs to be running for president. Because, no telling what would happen if he gets back into that white house. So thats my opinion. Thank you. Host all right, amsterdam amsterdam, new york. Good evening, go ahead, what are your thoughts on this case, did you get to listen today . Caller yes, its very hard to take him off the ballot. As bad as it was when they removed mr. Santos, he was never accused of anything either. Or not found guilty of anything. Its up to the American People to vote. Not for courts to decide who they can vote for or can vote against. To me, its all politically related, republicans against democrats, whatever. This whole thing seems to be over this. They just want him off the ballot. Other than that, i dont know what to tell you. Host thats what Justice Kavanaugh asked. He said, are you disenfranchising voters who want to support the former president . Again, if you missed any of todays oral arguments, you can find it on cspan. Org. You will find points of interest on the video player when you hit the play head. That will bring you to different questions from theustices. You will also, on our free mobile app, cspan now, be able to watch the entire tape. On those platforms, along with youtube, you could find cspans short take, its a compilation of all of the key moments from todays case. Again, here in a little bit on cspan, we are going to show you the entire oral arguments from earlier today. In the meantime, we are getting your reaction to what you heard from the justices and the lawyers in the courtroom. Bradley from los angeles, lets hear from you. Caller thank you for having me. I am a constitutional lawyer here in los angeles. And, i dont believe the Supreme Court is going to make a decision to keep trump off the ballot. I do believe its a states decision to be left alone, and that this is the type of case that the Supreme Court will deny touching. I doubt that they will kick him off the ballot. Host what does that mean . Colorado has said that he is disqualified to be on the ballot. The ballots in that state went out with his name on it because this case was brought before the Supreme Court. But the question is, do they count those ballots, those that voted for the president in their primary on march 5 . What are you saying the Supreme Court will say on that question . Caller i think the Supreme Court will allow those balance to be counted, but i think that they should respect the highest court of each states decision on that issue. Host lets go back to today and listen to the chief justice, john roberts, and his questioning of the lawyer representing some of the colorado voters and norma anderson, who brought this case up, trying to get the former president disqualified from the primary ball. I would expect that a od number of states will say, whoever the democticandidate is, you are off the ballot. In others, for the republican candidate, you are off the ll. It will come down to a handful of states that will decide the president ial election. That ia pretty daunting consequence. Certainly, your honor, the fact there are potential frivolous applications you might think they are frivolous, but the people who are bringing them may not think they are frivolous. Insurrection is a oaterm. If there is debate about it, thatilgo into the decision, then eventually, what we will be deciding, whether it was an insurrection when one president did something as opposed to when somebody else did something else, what do we do, do we wait until near the time of counting the ballots and putting through which states are valid and which states arent . Theres a reason sti three has been dormant for 150 years, because we have not seen anything like january 6 since reconstruction. Insurrection against the constitution is something extraordinary. Host chief justice john roberts, several Court Observers pointing to that question from todays oral argument today, saying that the chief justice has tipped his hat on how he would rule on this decision. Lewis, what do you think should happen in your state . Caller i think i think it is. I read about venezuela and russia taking the opposition off of their peloton i think, what terrible countries, we are so lucky to live in the united states. Then this happened and i think, we find different from them. They have arguments that the opposition violated the constitution and, therefore, cant run. I think this is voter suppression. The fact that the self, you know, before Martin Luther king, followed how they prevented american americans from voting because a candidate will win. Thank you. Host alright, thank you. Kristin in michigan. Caller its me, christine. Host go ahead. Caller i heard President Biden say that he wanted him to stay on the ticket. I think he should, too, so the people who want to work for him can. Host you dont think it should be the Supreme Court that makes that type of decision . Caller well i watched the whole thing and i dont think it should have never been sent to the Supreme Court. I just dont think that the colorado lady should have took it off. It should have been left on. Host understood. Mary in winchester, california. Hi, mary. We are listening to you. Go ahead. Caller i think its a shame that i would like to see trump on the ballot, but i think he should be on the ballot because he did inside an insurrection. We saw it on january 6. The Supreme Court is going to make their own decision, but i say, put him on the ballot. Lets see if he gets voted for or not. But make sure that i think the biggest problem is, this has never come up before. But now that it has, it should be addressed as, he shouldnt be on the ballot even though i would like to see him on the ballot. Host got it. Politico did a profile piece on a 90yearold woman who brought is case, norma anderson, she is quoted as saying, when duty call you do it. Norma anderson, a lifelong republican who rose to becom one of the top gop lawmakers in colorado, said she readily agreed to partipate when recruited an attorney working with the liberal government watchdog group, citizens for responsibili and ethics in washington, d. C. Anderson is part of a small group of former republican elected officials who have pushed to use the courts to disqlify mister trump from the ballot. A dozen former republica members of congress and three former reported governors filed briefs with the Supreme Court urging the justices decide with anderson and keep trump off, the ballot with almost no cuent or former democratic officials weighing in publicly in legal filings. Lets hear next from dan in fort collins, colorado. Hi, dan. Thanks for having me. Its an interesting voting referendum in terms of, you see over liberal influx in colorado. All the california voters. It is worrisome if you think those newer colorado voting people dont want to run the ballot. I have mixed feelings about it, i feel like they did dismiss the interaction piece of it. I have mixed feelings. But its interesting. I think the other caller said it best, let it be on the ballot and see what the other people decide. Host you may be interested in the questioning from Justice Elena kagan, lets listen to what she said today in the oral argument. [video clip] i think the question that you have to confronts why at a single sta suld decide who gets to be president of the united states. In other words, you know, this question of whether a former president is disqualified for insurrection to be president again is, you owjust say it, it sounds awfully national to me. So whatever means there are to enforcitould suggest that they have to be federal, national means. If youert from colorado, and youerfrom wisconsin or you were from mhin, and what the michigan secretary of state dad is going to make the difference between, you know, whether candidate a is elected or candidate b is elected, i mean, that seems quite extraordinary. Mr. Murraynoyour honor, because, ultimately, it ts court that is going to decide that question of federal constitutional eligibility and settle the issue forheation. And, certainly, it is not unusual that questions of National Importance come up through different states. Justice kagan well, i suppose this court would be saying something along the lines of that a steas the power to do it. But i guess i was i was ki you to go a little bit further in saying, why should that be the right rule . Why should a single state have the ability to make this determination not only for their own citizens, but for the rt of the nation . Mr. Murray because article ii gives them the power to to appoint their own electors as they see fit. But if they are going to use a federal constitutional qualification as a Ballot Access determinant, then it is creating a federal constuonal question that then this Court Decides d her courts, other states if this Court Affirms the decision below, determining thatredent trump is ineligible to be president , hestates would still have to determine what effect that would have on their own states law. Host the Supreme Court today hearing the case, trump v anderson, about whether or not the colorado primary ballot should have the former president s name on it, and the case sundering about 14 amendment section iii, the insurrection because of the institution. We are getting your reactions this evening and we will reair it in its entirety, coming up here on cspan. Vicki from west virginia, whether you think . i think it should be left on the ballot. If they are allowed to do that in texas, florida, republican states, they say, biden should able to run, that is a bigger insurrection than what we had in d. C. In d. C. There was not one weapon. The only person who got shot was shot by a cop, not by somebody who was there. Trump told them to go peacefully and patriotically to protest. And republicans did it peacefully and patriotically where the democrats burn cds, but thats ok, thats not an insurrection so they should leave him on the ballot. Host the former president talked about what he said on january 16 date when, at maralago, he went before reporters to give his reaction to the oral argument. [video clip] trump you take a look at my words right after my speech from the rose garden, which was shortly after, or you take a look at my i am only on truth now, but at that time sakai was on twitter. If you look at those five or six tweets, you will see very beautiful, very heartwarming statements. Go home. The police are doing their jobs. Et cetera, et cetera, beautiful statements. My statement in the rose garden, i think you have to watch that. Host the former president in florida reacting to the Supreme Court oral argument. He was talking about his remarks on january 6, 2021. If you want to watch those in their entirety, you can find them in our archives, go to cspan. Org. In our search engine, you can put in the former president s name for search and you will be able to watch every word that he said that day. Susan westlake, ohio. Caller i think the Supreme Court should affirm Colorado Supreme Court decision. Believe trump off of the ballot, because we have a constitution for a reason. And the constitution states insurrection, and he participated in the insurrection, for sure, and the only other time that the insurrection act has been used, the people who were presented from being in office after the civil war because of the insurrection act, or not convicted of anything either. So, trump doesnt need to be convicted to be prevented. I think you should be kept off the ballot. If people want to vote for him, they can write it in. Host so to listen closely today . Sounds like you did . Caller i listened a little bit. Host ok, because of your civil war reference, that was brought up in todays case . Caller yeah, that has been talked about a lot in the last few weeks. Host thank you. Joseph in pennsylvania. Hi, joseph. You are on. Go host [laughs] joseph, someone is prompting you. Its your turn. Caller my question is, say that he loses the ballot can he go back to colorado saying that he wasnt the state pulled both away from me . What happens about that. Host alright, what do you think should happen . Caller is he both, it should be countered. Seemed like they are taking both away from people. They are always saying get out there and vote. Now they are saying that if you write down anything, you are not going to get your vote counted. Host alright, justice in pennsylvania, joseph in pennsylvania, you will be our last this evening. The conversation will pick up tomorrow at 7 00 a. M. Eastern time. Thank you for joining us tonight. Now we will take you back to earlier today when the Supreme Court heard this oral argument in trump v anderson in its entirety right here on cspan