we start in washington, where the us supreme court is hearing a case, that could potentially stop donald trump running in the 2024 presidential election. it is a legal first those bringing the case are using the 14th amendment of the constitution, it is a legal first. those bringing the case are using the 14th amendment of the constitution, arguing he is disqualified from standing because he commited insurrection on january the 6th, trying to overturn the result of the 2020 election. that was successfully argued in the state of colorado in december, where he s been removed from the ballot. donald trump and his attorneys are arguing that any effort to stop him running is antidemocratic. the us supreme court is hearing about 80 minutes of oral argument today. we ve been bringing you details from inside the court as proceedings continue. they have about 20 minutes to go, we think. thejustices have given little indication over the last few weeks where they stand on the issue,
Stephanie ruhle, all here for msnbcs special coverage of these Court Arguments on the disqualification of donald trump. Welcome to our Primetime Recap of the historic proceedings that the United States Supreme Court. I am Rachel Maddow at msnbc home base along with my beloved colleagues, Lawrence Odonnell, and joy reid, and chris hayes, happy to have you all here. No cameras are allowed in federal courtrooms, including the United States Supreme Court, but today, for the arguments about whether china for having an insurrection against the u. S. Government, the justices did allow for the sound of the proceedings, the audio, to be livestreamed here on msnbc, we carried the audio of those Oral Arguments live unfold. That was starting just after 10 am eastern time. But we also know that people have lives, jobs, school, other responsibilities and might make it hard to take two hours out of a thursday to stare at an Audio Speaker for hours trying to figure out of that was gorsuch, or a Leader
that argument. there is some evidence to suggest that. any evidence to suggest the presidency was what they were focused on? there is some evidence of that. people saying we don t want jefferson davis to be elected president and one of the drafts of section three specifically mentioned the presidency and vice presidency. it wasn t the final inaction. it wasn t final but there was concern by some people about con federal insurrectionists ascendsing to the presidency. we didn t want to make a a history argument. the other side can come back and throw this counter evidence back in our face. we wanted to focus more on the text of the constitution. it was a compromise provision that was enacted in section three. let me ask you another question about the states because you have forcefully made an argument about the states not being able to enforce section three. so if we agree with you on that, what happens next? i thought you also wanted us to end the litigation so is
this is a historic moment for the united states supreme court and for american democracy. the justices about to consider whether donald trump is constitutionally barred from being president again. we ll hear the unprecedented arguments and the court s responses live. welcome to cnn s special live coverage of the trump ballot battle at the u.s. supreme court. i m kaitlan collins live outside the supreme court. and i m jake tapper. the nation s highest court will review this landmark case. the division by colorado s supreme court to disqualify former president trump from the 2024 ballot based on what some call the insurrectionist ban 12349th amendment to the u.s. constitution. today the nine justices, three of them nominated by trump, are poised to have the most direct impact on a presidential election since the supreme court decided bush v. gore nearly a quarter sentry ago. now among the questions before the highest court in the land today, did trump incite an insurrecti
is just plain wrong. on page 215 if you have the chance, i know it s a thick document, on page 215 the special counsel found the exact opposite. here s what he wrote. there is in fact a shortage of evidence that i willfully retained classified documents related to afghanistan. on page 12 special counsel also wrote for another documents the decision to decline criminal charges was straightforward. the evidence suggested mr. biden did not willfully retain these documents. the evidence said i did not willfully retain these documents. in addition, there are some attention paid to some parts of the report about my recollection of events. there is reference that i don t remember when my son died. how in the hell dare he raise that. frankly when i was asked the question i talk to myself it wasn t any of their damn business. let me tell you something. some of you have commented. eyewear since the day he died every single day the rosary he got. every memorial day we hold a service rem