Share this @internewscast.com

WASHINGTON — In ruling that states cannot kick Donald Trump off the ballot, the Supreme Court placed significant limits on any effort — including by Congress — to prevent the former president from returning to office.

Should Trump win the presidential election and lawmakers then seek to not certify the results and prevent him from taking office because he “engaged in insurrection” under Section 3 of the Constitution’s 14th Amendment, the decision could foreclose that action.

It is on that point that the court — notionally unanimous in ruling for Trump despite its 6-3 conservative majority — appeared to be divided, with the three liberal justices vehemently objecting to the apparent straitjacket the decision enforced on Congress.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a conservative, wrote her own opinion saying she also believed the court had decided issues it did not need to resolve but she did not join the liberal justices’ separate opinion.

Apparently, without the support of the four women justices, a five-justice majority said that Congress had to act in specific ways to enforce section 3.

“This gives the Supreme Court major power to second guess any congressional decision over enforcement of Section 3,” Rick Hasen, an election law expert at UCLA School of Law, wrote immediately after the ruling.

The Colorado Supreme Court had found Trump had violated the provision in contesting the 2020 presidential election results in actions that ended with the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.

In ruling for Trump, the U.S. Supreme Court specified that anything Congress does must be specifically tailored to addressing section 3, an implicit warning that broad legislation could be struck down.

“Today, the majority goes beyond the necessities of this case to limit how Section 3 can bar an oathbreaking insurrectionist from becoming president,” the liberal justices, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, wrote on their separate opinion.

By weighing in on the role of Congress, “the majority attempts to insulate all alleged insurrectionists from future challenges to their holding federal office,” they added.

One sentence in particular attracted the attention of legal experts, with the liberal justices writing that the majority was seemingly “ruling out enforcement under general federal statutes requiring the government comply with the law.”

Several observers said this may be a reference to Congress’ role in certifying the presidential election results should Trump win in November, which is now governed by the Electoral Count Reform Act enacted in 2022 with the aim of preventing another Jan. 6.

The law includes language saying that Congress can refuse to count electoral votes that are not “regularly given.” That could be interpreted to apply to a winning candidate who members of Congress believe is not eligible to serve under section 3.

Derek Muller, an election law expert at Notre Dame Law School, said it seemed the majority wanted to “close that door.”

But, he added, “the court is speaking somewhat opaquely here, as if it does not want to reveal the true substance of the disagreement.”

Jason Murray, who argued the Colorado case at the Supreme Court on behalf of the voters who wanted Trump kicked off the ballot, said he also thought the court may be referring to the Electoral Count Reform Act.

“It seems to me that one thing that the liberals might be referring to is the possibility that Congress might on January 6, 2025 refuse to count votes that were cast for former President Trump,” he added.

Not everyone agreed with that interpretation, with Richard Pildes, a professor at New York University School of Law, saying the liberal justices may have been referring to the potential for legal challenges about Trump’s authority as president if he were in office again.

If the court was addressing the counting of electoral college votes “they could easily have mentioned that if that’s what they meant,” he added.

Hasen wrote that the ruling means that if Trump wins the election and Congress tries to disqualify him, the Supreme Court “will have the last word.” In the meantime, “we may well have a nasty, nasty post-election period,” he added.


Share this @internewscast.com
You May Also Like
Fifth paralyzed patient implanted with Musk-backed Neuralink chip

Neuralink Installs Brain Chip in Fifth Paralyzed Patient

A fifth paralyzed patient has been implanted with a Neuralink chip backed…
Randy Couture, UFC Hall of Famer, hospitalized after racing crash

UFC Legend Randy Couture Hospitalized Following Racing Accident

The 62-year-old UFC Hall of Famer has been working to make his…
New Hampshire judge to hear arguments on class action against Trump’s birthright citizenship order

New Hampshire Court to Review Class Action Lawsuit Challenging Trump’s Order on Birthright Citizenship

A federal judge in New Hampshire is set to hear arguments on…
July 2025 Full buck moon in Capricorn: steady surrender

July 2025 Full Buck Moon in Capricorn: Embrace Stability and Letting Go

There’s a full moon rising in the grit and grind, strive and shine sign of the…
Federal audit of Rebuild Florida Program underway

Federal Review Begins for Rebuild Florida Initiative

The Deputy Inspector General for HUD discusses an audit of the Rebuild…
Freed from ICE detention, Mahmoud Khalil files $20 million claim against Trump administration

After Release from ICE Custody, Mahmoud Khalil Sues Trump Administration for $20 Million

In New York, Mahmoud Khalil sat in his apartment holding his 10-week-old…
Professor Proposes Renaming His School 'George Floyd University'... Then He Really Goes Off the Rails

Professor Suggests Renaming His School ‘George Floyd University’… Then Things Take a Surprising Turn

In this episode of “No, This Isn’t a Satire Piece From the…
Photo of a teenage girl and a woman.

Brave 17-year-old dies rescuing his entire family from a van that fell off a cliff into dangerous floodwaters.

A BRAVE teenager saved her entire family after their van plunged off…
Paul McCartney tour 2025 announced: Cities, dates, how to get tickets

Paul McCartney 2025 Tour Details: Schedule, Locations, and Ticket Information

It’ll be McCartney’s first North American tour since 2022. WASHINGTON — Paul…
Crockett said she 'broke down in tears' watching Alex Padilla get forcibly removed from press conference

Crockett Said Watching Alex Padilla Being Forced Out of Press Conference Made Her Cry

In a recent podcast interview, Rep. Jasmine Crockett of Texas expressed that…
Multiple Secret Service Agents Suspended In Connection with Trump Assassination Attempt

Several Secret Service Agents Suspended Over Alleged Involvement in Attempted Trump Assassination

On Wednesday during “Jesse Watters Primetime” on Fox News, the host shared…
New Hampshire judge to pause Trump's birthright citizenship order

New Hampshire Judge Halts Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Directive

A federal judge in New Hampshire announced on Thursday that he will…