GOP hypocrisy reaches new lows in Trump disqualification case 

On Thursday, 180 Republicans It has been submitted Preparation to the U.S. Supreme Court urging this Overturns Colorado Supreme Court's decision to disqualify Donald Trump From the state's primary voting in the 2024 presidential election. The briefing offers another example of how Republicans' dedication and partisan loyalty to a former president is exposed beneath the surface of lofty principles and legal rhetoric. .

Comparing this to this seemingly neutral defense of parliamentary privilege reveals the hypocrisy of many of those who signed the brief. What did they do or not do to protect Trump's privileges when he was in the Oval Office?. Now, rallying to the cause of the Republican front-runner, the brief argues that Colorado's decision “tramples on the privileges of members of Congress.” […] Ensure that Congress has control over the enforcement and (if necessary) lifting of Article III's incumbency “barriers.” ”

The brief states that “Efficiency of Article III requires Congress to enact legislation that would protect candidates from abuse by state authorities. vote to lift the “barrier'' in Article III, thereby empowering disqualified individuals to “take office'' at any time they wish, including during a campaign or after an election. election. ” The brief argues that the Colorado Supreme Court's decision “short-circuited both of Congress's roles.”

“As a member of Congress, Amici has a strong interest in legitimizing and protecting the role of Congress in the context of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment,” the Republicans said.

Such a statement would have made James Madison proud.

In Federalist 51 he I have written“The great security against the gradual concentration of several powers in the same department is that those who control each department have the necessary constitutional means and personal incentives to resist encroachments on the other departments.'' It consists in giving. …Ambition must be made to counter ambition. One's interests must be related to the constitutional rights of the place.”

But the senators who signed the brief are hardly paragons of Madisonian virtue. They have not committed themselves to protecting the “constitutional rights” of their institutions.

In fact, many of them stood idly by during the Trump administration. regularly refuse or refuse to cooperate; with a House or Senate committee.

In fact, they actively encouraged such rebellion.as Bipartisan group Co-Equal “With a few notable exceptions, Republican lawmakers supported President Trump's failure to comply with Congressional oversight, reversing positions they held when Democrats were president.”

During President Trump's four years in office, Congress had many opportunities to assert its authority.President Trump's executive branch officials Rejected “To provide information requested by Congress in more than 100 Congressional investigations and investigations.” The administration has not responded to Congress' requests for documents or witnesses and has directed officials and individuals not to provide information to Congress. They even filed a lawsuit “to prevent third parties from complying with Congressional subpoenas.”

Last week, one of the most ardent supporters of such obstruction and noncompliance, Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, signed a brief defending Republican Congressional authority, this time on the grounds that it would help Trump. Examples of Jordan's hypocrisy regarding the exercise of its authority are numerous.

For example, in 2019, Jordan opposed a Congressional subpoena “seeking records of the Trump administration,” as Co-Equal notes.Separation policy for immigrant children,security clearance processandDecision to include citizenship question in 2020 Census”

When Democrats wanted to take depositions during the House impeachment inquiry into President Trump's efforts to impeach Ukraine; Digging up dirt on political rival Joe BidenRepublicans oppose deposition, Joint Equality Observe“It got so intense that over 30 Republicans joined in.”forced their wayThey participated in witness depositions that they were not authorized to attend. ”

They did so even though Congressional committees routinely take depositions during investigations.

Jordan took part in the chaos during the impeachment inquiry.claimed “The American people understand fairness and instinctively know that what is happening here is unfair,'' one of the lead authors of the brief submitted to the Supreme Court said. House Republican Steve Scalise said: called Depositions in impeachment cases are a “Soviet-style process” and “should not be allowed in the United States.”

Jordan and Scalise probably hope people don't remember their behavior from the Trump era. Or maybe he's just trying to show his loyalty to the former president.

If this brief isn't hypocritical, it indulges in unfettered “I wonder” arguments regarding the question of whether Mr. Trump staged an insurrection after being voted out of office.

that claimThe Colorado Supreme Court's definition of insurrection is so broad that it encourages the court to use the term to describe what it calls “partisan grievances,” and attempts to normalize it. I am doing What did Trump do after the 2020 election?“Americans frequently, even routinely, argue about election results,” he said.

Along the way, the Republican brief claims, “Stacey Abrams believes she 'won' the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial election.” Hillary Clinton believes Donald Trump “stolen” the 2016 election. Many believe that in 2004, “high-tech voting machines'' fabricated decisive votes for President Bush, challenged Ohio's electoral rolls, and attempted to change the outcome of the election. ”

Additionally, “Politicians from both parties have repeatedly voted against certifying some states' electors in presidential elections since 2000. At the time, some of these disputes were accompanied by riots. ” he added.

And, ignoring the violence that occurred on January 6, 2021, he said, “In times of polarization, opposition rhetoric about election results encourages others to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power.'' “It's easy to throw around,” he said.

Adding to the list of “what will happen” is “President Biden says a significant portion, if not all, of Republican voters are determined to destroy democracy. …A very large number of partisan state officials If it believes that something is at risk, it may do everything it can to disrupt normal democratic processes.”

In the end, the Republican brief asked the Supreme Court to “minimize partisan incentives to use the extraordinary sanctions of Article III to exclude opponents from the vote” by voting Donald Trump. We ask that you leave it on paper.

No matter what the Supreme Court decides in the Trump disqualification case, we should not take at face value the brief's transparent efforts to create a smokescreen by labeling others as insurrectionists. And if former President Trump were to return to office, would Jim Jordan, Steve Scalise, and the other 178 Republicans who signed last week's brief be equally vigilant in protecting Congressional privilege? It's hard to imagine.

Austin Surratt (@ljstprof) is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Law and Political Science at Amherst College. The views expressed here do not necessarily represent the views of Amherst College.