decide whether or not our democracy will survive. that s not hyperbolic. and the battle for the ballot, at least for a, now i will the colorado lawsuit. removing trump from the primary ballot in that state and the legal precedent it could set for other state challenges. and rushing to defend, why the republicans who are actually running against donald trump now defending him in the wake of the colorado ruling? i am ayman mohyeldin, let s get started. this week, something remarkable unfolded in our nation s capital. president biden publicly addressed a group of people who are set to have an extraordinary impact on the upcoming 2024 presidential elections. the nine justices who sit on the united states supreme court. on tuesday, president biden delivered a eulogy at the funeral of the first female justice, sandra day o connor, and in his remarks, the president hailed o connor as an american pioneer, noting her commitment to the court in the rule of law. to her, the su
we start tonight with the news out of colorado. the state supreme court has ruled that former president donald trump should be removed from the 2024 republican primary ballot. since january 6th there has been plenty of discussion in legal circles and even some excitement about section 3 of the 14th amendment of the constitution which bans insurrectionists and people who have aided insurrectionists from holding office. and there has been a whole lot of interest in whether this section of the amendment might bar donald trump from running for office because of his role in the january 6th insurrection. now, the minnesota state supreme court dismissed the idea. over in michigan the judge ruled that trump could not be taken off that state s ballot. in total 14th amendment suits to disqualify trump have been dismissed in four states. they are pending appeal in two states, and they are pending being heard for the first time in 13 states. and just until two hours ago, it looked like c
of the 14th amendment in the constitution, which bans insurrectionists and people of aided insurrectionists from holding office. and there has been a whole lot of interest in whether this section of the amendment might bar donald trump from running from office because of his role in the january 6th insurrection. the minnesota state court dismissed the idea. over michigan, a judge ruled a trump could not be taken off that states ballot. in total, 14th amendment suits to disqualify trump have been dismissed in four states. they are pending appeal in two states and they are panicked being heard in for the first time in 13 states. and just until two hours ago, it looked like colorado would go in a similar direction to what we have seen in these other states. last month in colorado the issue got a weeklong public hearing in district court and you may not have been paying attention but there were high prideful witnesses, like congressman ken buck, and trump aide kash patel who spok
minister and the right wing extremists to make up an important part of his coalition are still in power. david rothkopf, as always, and happy holidays to you and your family. thank you, david. a lot more coming up. you re watching msnbc. our second hour starts right now. [inaudible] > [inaudible hey everybody, good to see you. i m yasmin vossoughian. if you are just joining us, welcome. if you are sticking with us, we are very thankful for that. with the stroke of a pan, the dawn of giving donald trump exactly what he wants refusal to take up an issue that is clearly headed their way. now puts the chances of trying the former president for election interference before the next election in serious jeopardy. meanwhile, trump may face new legal danger from a new tape that have surfaced trying to pressure a group of republican officials in michigan to help him overturn the election. there s lots of speculation about that. obviously the fact that it comes out right after
court. jack smith requested that the supreme court circumvent the normal appellate process to quickly decide the process and presidential immunity. it is an important question about the powers of the presidency that the courts have really considered before. it could determine whether the criminal election interference cases against trump in washington d.c. and in fulton county georgia can move forward on schedule, or at all. this decision from the supreme court does not mean that the case against trump is dead. far from. in the d.c. court of appeals has agreed to expedite this case. a hearing is already scheduled for january 9th. the supreme court could still weigh in on the matter at a later date. however, this decision does threaten to delay the march 4th start date for trump s federal election interference trial, since judge tanya chutkan was, as a matter of normal procedure, compelled to pause proceedings on her case until the appeal is resolved. however, simultaneously