Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Colorado judge keeps Trump on 2024 primary ballot as latest 14th Amendment case falters [View all]LetMyPeopleVote
(180,291 posts)48. CO judge's 'bizarro' Trump eligibility ruling ripped apart by constitutional law experts
This opinion is very questionable. It makes no sense that the POTUS is the only official who is not subject to Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. I agree with Prof. Tribe and Judge Luttig's analysis
Link to tweet
https://www.rawstory.com/trump-ineligible-2024/
Former federal Judge Michael Luttig and constitutional law expert Laurence Tribe spoke with host Ali Velshi less than 24 hours hour the ruling came down where Wallace agreed the former president took part in the Jan. 6 insurrection but didn't feel he was covered by wording in Section Three that would bar him from running for office.
According to Tribe, the judge made an "egregious error" in her ruling which Tribe also labeled as "bizzaro."
"The court did egregiously error in holding that the office of the president is not an office under the United States, turning constitutional interpretation upside down, by finding the unambiguous text of Section Three ambiguous because of a sliver of debate history that is not only itself ambiguous, but is rendered singularly unpersuasive by other exchanges in the debate history," Luttig explained. "That reflects the understanding that the office of president is of course an office under the United States, from which a person can be disqualified by Section Three."
'You suggested that this was a narrow interpretation of section three," he told the MSNBC host. "It is that and more. It is the narrowest possible interpretation of Section Three, it's the interpretation urged on the court by the former president's lawyers. But it's simply incorrect as a matter of constitutional law."
According to Tribe, the judge made an "egregious error" in her ruling which Tribe also labeled as "bizzaro."
"The court did egregiously error in holding that the office of the president is not an office under the United States, turning constitutional interpretation upside down, by finding the unambiguous text of Section Three ambiguous because of a sliver of debate history that is not only itself ambiguous, but is rendered singularly unpersuasive by other exchanges in the debate history," Luttig explained. "That reflects the understanding that the office of president is of course an office under the United States, from which a person can be disqualified by Section Three."
'You suggested that this was a narrow interpretation of section three," he told the MSNBC host. "It is that and more. It is the narrowest possible interpretation of Section Three, it's the interpretation urged on the court by the former president's lawyers. But it's simply incorrect as a matter of constitutional law."
?si=xtN9DpghIs86BaeS
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
54 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Colorado judge keeps Trump on 2024 primary ballot as latest 14th Amendment case falters [View all]
LetMyPeopleVote
Nov 2023
OP
Sure, after you point out where it says anyone can claim he's an insurrectionist. We need to beat trump at polls
Silent Type
Nov 2023
#8
I find it best to read posts for content, rather than pointing at, and mouthing, each word, looking
Silent Type
Nov 2023
#11
Aren't we presumed innocent until proven guilty? Why would this be different?
oldsoftie
Nov 2023
#36
Maybe they thought it was glaringly obvious that the presidency was the preeminent office in the country.
LudwigPastorius
Nov 2023
#17
The judge said he's on ballot, all the other stuff carries little, if any, weight. Michigan also dismissed
Silent Type
Nov 2023
#23
Watched a fairly comprehensive program on C-SPAN that addressed the applicability of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
24601
Nov 2023
#24
So parents preserving, protecting, and defending their children are not supporting them? Nonsense
Bernardo de La Paz
Nov 2023
#29
Actual words make the difference in determining legal outcomes. Bronston v. United States, 409 U.S. 352 (1973) for
24601
Nov 2023
#35
Thank our atty gen for wasting a year before doing something about all this.
diverdownjt
Nov 2023
#31
Colorado judge rules Trump 'engaged in insurrection' -- but can still run for president
LetMyPeopleVote
Nov 2023
#5
"the 14th Amendment's ban on insurrectionists holding office does not apply to the president. ." was the Ruling.........
riversedge
Nov 2023
#10
I see. Judges that are dealing with Trump's criminal charges aren't afraid of him...
brooklynite
Nov 2023
#21
"any office, civil or military, under the United States," What office does the President come under ? Civil office?
Mr. Sparkle
Nov 2023
#13
This is BS. Since when does insurrection happen then? He tried to circumvent a election victory by
SWBTATTReg
Nov 2023
#14
The gambit was trying to stop Trump from getting elected by kicking him off the ballot...
brooklynite
Nov 2023
#20
Prof. Tribe and Judge Luttig thinks that this ruling will end being a win
LetMyPeopleVote
Nov 2023
#27
Professor Tribe and Judge Luttig explain why the Colorado 14th Amendment decision is wrong
LetMyPeopleVote
Nov 2023
#38
Professor Tribe and Judge Luttig are great on TV, but I sure wouldn't want them defending me. Luttig takes
Silent Type
Nov 2023
#39
CO judge's 'bizarro' Trump eligibility ruling ripped apart by constitutional law experts
LetMyPeopleVote
Nov 2023
#48
Plaintiffs will appeal Colorado's decision to allow Trump to remain on the ballot
LetMyPeopleVote
Nov 2023
#52
The Colorado Supreme Court set arguments for 12/6 in the TFG 14th Amendment disqualification case
LetMyPeopleVote
Nov 2023
#53