lot of consternation around this question. and, yet, the ball is moving down the field. yes. i mean, the i would have talked to marc s point about originalism, if you look at the 14th amendment, section 3 from an originalist perspective, you say, sure, they re talking about confederate generals, they re talking about confederate soldiers who took up arms against the republic. but if you look at the 14th amendment as a whole, the 14th amendment, which was the post civil war amendment, is incredibly important and it is famously for incorporating the bill of rights into the federal constitution. basically the first time the court said the bill of rights applies to the states. so i think the court has to look at this in the macro context that this is an important amendment and it is something that they can t just do some technical qualification, that it is not donald trump is not eligible because he s not an officer in the way that other
will, no? yeah. i think they re going to take this case. they should take this case, i agree. rarely do i agree with donald trump and his lawyers, but this is a case of profound national importance. now, mind you, there is some tension between them saying you need to take this case up and it is a profound national importance and by the way, the court really shouldn t be deciding this case at all. i understand that you can make that argument, but, you know, i don t want people to think when i say that he is not portraying strength that is purely in the political arena. i argued and won four cases before the u.s. supreme court. and, you know, part of what you re trying to do in these arguments is, of course, you want to offer every opportunity for the court to rule in your favor. so i completely understand why you would offer the procedural off ramps. but i do think that as you re counting votes, as he s trying to count to five, which is, you know, what you need in the u.s. supreme cou
frame of reference, then donald trump is in a lot of trouble. if you take the words of section 3 of the 14th amendment as they are, what you have is that he is, if he is found to be an insurrectionist, is barred from running for president. what you have in colorado is a trial court who had a hearing and had each side present evidence who found that he is that he did engage in insurrection. and as jordan knows, that is subject to a very deferential standard. the supreme court is bound by the trial court s determination unless they find it to be clearly erroneous. it is not clearly erroneous. i happen to think it is correct. i happen to think you think it is correct, i think jordan thinks it is a correct. even if it is a close question, they re bound by what the trial court found after that evidentiary hearing. i think he should be very worried about this. marc elias, jordan rubin, thank you for reading this so quickly, for jumping on with us
and creepy ads that follow youa from google and other companie. and there s no catch. it s fre. we make money from ads, but they don t follow you aroud join the millions of people taking back their privacy by downloading duckduckgo on all your devices today. we return with the breaking news, donald trump asking the united states supreme court to reverse the colorado ruling barring him from that state s ballot and ensuring he can stay on primary ballots nationwide. we are back with jason, molly,
will all play out. given that the case law is so thin here, to what extent do you think the justices are relying and watching what the appeals courts do? it s one appeals court here. the d.c. circuit. most cases don t get to the supreme court until an issue is percolated among multiple sur kits, but this is not that kind of a case. i actually think there s a not insubstantial chance if the d.c. circuit rules and makes a thorough ruling and has using the strictest tests possible, that the supreme court might deny to take this case. i realize it s important. it s an issue of first i want ill presentation. it s never been decided before. but that also happened back in trump v. thompson. this was the case. tim know it is well. this is where the house select committee sought presidential records. donald trump came in and sued bennie thompson saying as a former president, i have the right to assert executive