Earlier this month, the US Supreme Court unanimously smacked down the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision to kick Donald Trump off the state’s primary ballot to disqualify him from running for office.
Additionally, five justices — Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, Clarence Thomas and Chief Justice John Roberts — wrote “that a federal ‘officer’ cannot be removed from a state ballot unless Congress has passed legislation.”
The high court offered its ruling a week after announcing it would hear ex-President Donald Trump’s argument claiming he has absolute immunity from federal prosecution.
READ MORE: ‘Political and traitorous decision’: Experts outraged by SCOTUS taking Trump immunity case
During Sunday’s episode of MSNBC’s Velshi, host Ali Velshi spoke with University of Pennsylvania School of Law constitutional law professor Kermit Roosevelt III about the way the high court has been moving when it comes to cases concerning the former president.
“It’s a common refrain, the people accuse judges — Supreme Court justices — who don’t share their political opinion of judicial activism,” Velshi noted. “You said that that phrase is not helpful, because what it doesn’t distinguish between is sort of activism or advocacy, versus extremism.”
Roosevelt replied, “I think it’s hard to figure out what people mean by activism most of the time. I think the question you should ask is really, is the court doing what it should do? Is it acting in a way or answering questions that courts are good at answering. This is the question, who is qualified to be on the ballot for president? It’s absolutely within the competence of courts. The Colorado court to its credit tried to answer the question. Now the supreme court said you will not get a judicial answer. We are not going to decide that question even though it’s our job. I think it’s doing it out of the sense of institutional self- preservation. that’s bad. the court should not defend itself. It should defend America, defend democracy. I think the court is really worried about itself.”
Velshi replied, “That’s a tricky one. you say the court should not have to defend itself, it’s the same as any institution that is attacked, there’s an instinct to do so, but it’s self-perpetuating. People who didn’t trust the court will trust the court less.”
READ MORE: ‘Not clear enough’: Scholars warn SCOTUS ruling creates the very ‘chaos’ they ‘were trying to avoid’
The University of Pennsylvania law professor said, “Yes, and I think the court is not doing its job now. it’s an interesting question why it’s not doing its job. one answer would be, it’s been taken over by the MAGA extremists. I don’t think it explains the majority of the justices, maybe a couple of them. But I think the more powerful explanation, they are trying to win back the popular support. The reason they took the immunity case, probably, is they want to decide something against Trump. They say he can stay on the ballot, but now they’re going to say he doesn’t have this crazy total immunity that he’s claiming, and they’re gonna try to present themselves as a balance institution just being a fair referee.”
Watch the video below or at this link.
SCOTUS is ‘not doing its job’ and ‘only worried about itself’: legal expertwww.youtube.com
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Source: alternet.org
