DThe hearings before the Supreme Court in Washington are only an interim step on the way to a verdict. But they often provide information about which side the nine judges lean towards.
That was also the case on Thursday, when a question with great political explosiveness was up for discussion: whether Donald Trump can be banned from another term in office based on the 14th Amendment because he took part in an insurrection in January 2021.
Trump had turned to the highest court in the United States to overturn a decision from the state of Colorado. There, the Supreme Court ruled that the former president was disqualified for another term in office because of his role in the storming of the Capitol on January 6, 2021. He should not be on the ballot papers. The responsible election officer in the state of Maine agreed with this decision, but many other states refrained from following this reading.
When is a riot a riot?
At the eagerly awaited hearing on Thursday, which lasted a good two hours, both sides had to publicly defend their position for the first time. Trump's lawyer Jonathan Mitchell argued on several levels. First, he said that Trump did not take part in an insurrection because the storming of the Capitol was not one. It was “criminal violence worthy of condemnation” (a “riot”), but not an uprising within the meaning of the constitution (an “insurrection”). Liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson asked back: “A chaotic attempt to overthrow the government is not an insurrection?” Mitchell stood by it.
According to Trump's lawyer, it is Congress' job to decide whether someone can be excluded from an election – even if that person has previously admitted to being an insurrectionist, Mitchell said when asked by Chief Justice John Roberts. The candidate is then still allowed to “run and even win election for office.” Then it would be up to Congress to decide. One of Trump's core arguments is the term “officer”, which the 14th Amendment refers to but which does not apply to him. According to the lawyers, this refers to lower-ranking officials, but not the president.
But the debate got more heated when the hearing turned to Jason Murray, the Colorado attorney. The questions from the conservative and left-liberal judges suggest that Trump will be on the ballot in Colorado. The central question was where the decision-making power over candidates for national elections lies. Several justices expressed skepticism that individual states should decide which candidates to run in a nationwide election.
Trump speaks out from Mar-a-Lago
For example, the left-liberal judge Elena Kagan asked why an individual state should have the opportunity “to make this decision not for its own citizens, but also for the entire country.” This seemed “pretty strange” to her. Attorney Jason Murray replied that each state would still have the opportunity to decide on the candidates on its own ballot, regardless of other states.
Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh, in turn, addressed a different point in the argument. He asked Murray why Trump had been disqualified from the election on the grounds of participating in an insurrection when he had not even been charged with it during the investigation into the storming of the Capitol. Voters would be “disenfranchised” by this position. Murray argues that a federal conviction is not necessary to disqualify Trump from voting under the 14th Amendment.
Donald Trump himself commented on the appointment at the Supreme Court from Mar-a-Lago. Things went “very well” for him. But the case is “another attempt at election interference by the Democrats.”
#Storming #Capitol #Trump #part #election
