Supreme Court and Trump's eligibility

The last few months have been seen lots of people writing about why or why not the 14th Amendment should apply to Trump. Ostensibly these have been on "both sides of the aisle" but that overlooks the reality that one side of the aisle are people who will believe absolutely fabrication Trump spoon feeds them and are largely incapable of anything resembling critical thought. Instead we are led to believe examples like J. Michael Luttig and George Conway III are somehow examplars of the mouth-breathers occupying the other side of the aisle simply because they at one time attached an (R) to their names.

They are not.

But that's not really my point in today's likely unfinished rant. Instead, that is to make this one singular statement before the case is heard: the Supreme Court as currently constituted will decide that Trump is eligible for office and that the cases from Colorado, Maine, and anywhere else are decided for Trump. Despite the avalanche of articles debating the "merits" of the case, this is a foregone conclusion. And ultimately, the court (or at least the majority opinion) , doesn't really even need to explain itself or come up with a good reason. Lord knows, they haven't bothered much lately.

In the interest of wild speculation, I will make a few guesses about the specifics:

  • The case will not be decided on a unanimous basis

  • The majority opinion will attempt some Bush v. Gore trash wherein they state this is a one-time decision that does not establish precedent. (Thomas will wink knowingly at the ex-Confederacy to let them know they can totally bring cases to remove future democratic candidates.)

  • Thomas will NOT recuse himself even though Ginnie was up to her ears in this rebellion.

  • It will be made on a highly technical basis on a secondary issue to the core questions (like, Trump didn't get due process in Colorado) in an attempt to obscure the fact that any plain reading of the amendment, its history, etc. all point to the fact Trump should be excluded.

  • They will somehow dodge the question of whether or not Trump is an insurrectionist.

They MIGHT get Kagan to go along in the interest of... whatever. I doubt they can pluck off Sotomayor and Brown-Jackson who will likely write pathetically prescient opinions which they won't be allowed to read out in the court. But in the end, Trump will win for the same reasons O'Connor sided with Bush back then - the justices are no better than 2-bit huckster politicians just like the average doofus congressman. They simply lucked into lifetime appointments.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Can't Work? No Healthcare

It's time that the United States - and the MAGA party in particular - own its policy that if you don't work, you don't deserve healthcare. I was listening to NPR (I know, I know...) and there was a story about the ACA premiums exploding with the expiration of subsidies. They interviewed a doddering retiree (on Medicare, naturally) and it really should be quoted in full here: QUIRMBACH: Here, extending help for ACA enrollees does not have a lot of support. Stepping away from the game, Rita Schulte, a retiree who's on Medicare, the federal health program that covers most seniors, says the Obamacare enhanced subsidies should only be extended a short time, if at all. Schulte says for people who aren't retired like her, she wants bigger changes in the Affordable Care Act that lower costs for taxpayers. RITA SCHULTE: If they'd ever get it overhauled, maybe we wouldn't need all this extra help from the government because you can't rely on the governmen...
Read more

ICE & Theories for the Midterms

Image
Theory: ICE on the ground in cities is meant to accustom (and build an “excuse” – such as it is) for the public so when the midterms come around, the paramilitary thugs on the street are already in place to help out with voter intimidation. Who in their right mind will risk going out to vote unless they look like they are of northern European extraction? My unfinished idea today is that the reason that Seattle hasn’t been targeted much harder for ICE raids is that Washington has mail in voting. As in, the entire state votes by mail and there is really no opportunity in the state to vote in person even if you wanted to. Thus, there isn’t any real “efficiency” to wasting your agents intimidating a population that, due to logistical reasons, it doesn’t really make much sense to bother with. The juice isn’t worth the squeeze to use a modern idiom. ICE raids could be happening in rural areas, where a LOT of illegal immigrants are working in industri...
Read more

What Comes Next?

This should be a theme of discussion - Trump has largely destroyed the old order of the past 75 years. The old-school liberals might continue to fight some kind of rear-guard action to protect the institutions and processes but the foundational trust has been shattered and will take a generation at a minimum of careful rebuilding. The centrist liberals need to seize this opportunity to decide what gets built on the ashes in the United States. And there is a very real likelihood they will not even get to CHOOSE, they will have a selection of bad to worse choices placed in front of them... - International military position of the US: NATO, our Asian allies (South Korea, Japan, Taiwan), Israel, the Middle East. Do we want to espouse our "values"? Realpolitik? Isolationism? What does the world look like if the US simply withdraws? Can it? Does the world WANT us to? - Finance/Trade: free movement of labor to match free movemen...
Read more