Jamie Raskin cheers Colorado determination, dares U.S. Supreme Court to permit Trump on 2024 poll
Rep. Jamie Raskin stated Thursday that the Constitution might “not be any clearer” relating to former President Donald Trump‘s ineligibility to hold office again under the 14th Amendment.
Mr. Raskin, who used to be a constitutional lawyer, said this is a chance for the Supreme Court justices “to show they really mean it when they talk about textualism, when they talk about originalism, the plain text of the Constitution could not be any clearer.”
He said any other decision would be a repeat of what he called the “radically political and partisan intervention” of the Supreme Court in the Bush v. Gore challenge in the 2000 election.
“If Donald Trump is not disqualified from holding office again after what he did on [Jan. 6, 2021] and the weeks leading up to it, then who is disqualified?” the Maryland Democrat said on CNN. “Why would they read an entire provision out of the Constitution? So, this is their opportunity to behave like real Supreme Court justices.”
A Colorado Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that the former president engaged in an insurrection with his behavior regarding the 2020 election. The 4-3 decision ruled that he was disqualified from the presidency under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which bars anyone who swore an oath to support the Constitution and then “engaged in insurrection” from holding office.
The court ordered the removal of Mr. Trump‘s name from the state’s March 5 GOP major poll.
The determination has obtained blended evaluations from politicians and voters throughout the political spectrum. Mr. Trump‘s spokesperson, Steven Cheung, stated they’ll battle the choice.
“It’s a ridiculous claim that the president can commit any crime that he or she wants while in office and can’t be prosecuted, whether it’s murder or rape or conspiracy to overthrow the government,” stated Mr. Raskin, who has been an outspoken critic of Mr. Trump since earlier than the Capitol riot.
When requested if he would settle for the choice if the Supreme Court determined to let Mr. Trump on the poll, Mr. Raskin stated he would “accept it in the sense” that he accepted the ruling of the Bush v. Gore case in 2000 when it was determined that George W. Bush had gained the presidency.
He referred to as that ruling “another radically political and partisan intervention by right-wing conservative justices blessed by the Federalist Society.”
