By Rick Hasen (UCLA Law School)
The Supreme Court’s unsigned majority opinion in Trump v. Anderson, ending Colorado’s attempt to disqualify Donald Trump from appearing on the ballot as an insurrectionist, is a remarkable self-own. It simultaneously turned what could have been a short, sweet (if weakly reasoned) unanimous holding about states not having the individual power to disqualify presidential candidates from their ballots into a bitter 5–4 dispute over the scope of Congress’ power to disqualify candidates. And if the majority felt that it needed to take the heat from the court’s liberals and from Justice Amy Coney Barrett because it wanted to provide clarity that Congress cannot try to disqualify Trump if he appears to be reelected when Congress counts Electoral College votes on Jan. 6, 2025, it made a mess. Leading scholars and lawyers reading the opinion already disagree over what Congress can do and how, keeping the door open to potential chaos. It’s a rare miss by a usually strategic and savvy Chief Justice John Roberts.***
No comments:
Post a Comment