Progressives are furious over the Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling that states cannot disqualify former President Donald Trump from participating in the 2024 presidential vote, with some suggesting the court be “disbanded” .
In a historic ruling Monday, the Supreme Court said only Congress can use the 14th Amendment’s “insurrection clause” to disqualify federal candidates from voting. The ruling, which came just before Super Tuesday, overturned a 4-3 Colorado Supreme Court opinion in December that barred Trump from appearing on the ballot.
Colorado Secretary of State Jenna Griswold (D-CO) said she was “disappointed” in a post on We are disappointed in the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to strip the U.S.A.Colorado could stop oath-breaking riots. [sic] From our ballots.
I am disappointed in the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to strip states of their ability to enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment against candidates for Congress. Colorado should be able to remove oath-breaking insurrection from our votes.
— Jena Griswold (@JenaGriswold) March 4, 2024
Later, Griswold appeared on MSNBC and lamented that voters will decide who becomes president.
“I believe the state should be able under the Constitution to stop insurrectionists who break their oaths. And ultimately, this decision will either remain unresolved or Congress will act and pass authorizing legislation. It leaves the door open for it to pass. But we know Congress is a largely dysfunctional institution. So whether we can save our democracy in November depends on “Ultimately it’s up to American voters,” she said.
Colorado Secretary of State Jenna Griswold is currently on MSNBC crying about SCOTUS. She doesn’t like President Trump’s 9-0 ruling. https://t.co/qA8m6CGxXl pic.twitter.com/0zmeVxUUld
— Charles R. Downs (@TheCharlesDowns) March 4, 2024
There were more volatile reactions.
Keith Olbermann, a former sportscaster and political commentator, criticized even progressives on the court and called for the Supreme Court to be “disbanded.” He posted, “X: The Supreme Court betrayed democracy.” Its members, including Jackson, Kagan, and Sotomayor, were found to lack reading comprehension. And the “court” as a whole was revealed to be corrupt and illegitimate.
The Supreme Court has betrayed democracy. Its members, including Jackson, Kagan, and Sotomayor, were found to lack reading comprehension. And on the whole, the “courts” were revealed to be corrupt and illegitimate.
It must be dissolved.
— Keith Olbermann⌚️ (@KeithOlbermann) March 4, 2024
Gen Z Democratic influencer Harry Sisson attacked only Justice Clarence Thomas for the ruling, even though all the justices supported it.
Insurrectionist Clarence Thomas has ruled that insurrectionist Donald Trump can remain on the ballot in 2024. That should be the headline.
Insurrectionist Clarence Thomas has ruled that insurrectionist Donald Trump can remain on the ballot in 2024. That should be the headline.
— Harry Sisson (@harryjsisson) March 4, 2024
Progressive journalists also criticized the decision.
CNN’s Dana Bash called this “unfortunate for America” in one segment.
WATCH: CNN’s Dana slams the Supreme Court’s 9-0 decision that overturned Colorado’s move to remove Donald Trump from the ballot:
“Unfortunately for America, the court is not necessarily wrong that this is the way the Framers wanted it. They wanted Congress, the people… pic.twitter.com/ilpVcQA0n0
— Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) March 4, 2024
Vox senior correspondent Ian Millhiser posted on X:
I laughed out loud at the ridiculous idea that a written constitution would effectively rein in a tyrannical government!
I laughed out loud at the ridiculous idea that a written constitution would effectively rein in a tyrannical government! https://t.co/ATm9FLxf4V
— Ian Millhiser (@imillhiser) March 4, 2024
CNN legal analyst Norm Eisen also criticized the Supreme Court for making its decision just before Super Tuesday instead of last week, saying it “put wind in President Trump’s sails.”
If I had joined SCOTUS, I would have ruled on the 14A case sooner.
The short period between the ruling and Super Tuesday risks giving President Trump the wind right before primary voters go to the polls and making the court seem political.
explained @cnni @BeckyCNN pic.twitter.com/5tZjRkgt60
— Norm Eisen (norm.eisen on thread) (@NormEisen) March 4, 2024
He and other liberals argued that the Supreme Court did not “unequivocally deny” that Trump is an “insurrectionist.”
“In a sense, they are leaving criminal authorities and the American public with the question of what to do about Donald Trump’s alleged criminal acts,” he argued.
SCOTUS could have explicitly overruled Colorado’s finding that Trump is an insurrectionist, but they did not
It has a major impact on the pending criminal case against him and the November criminal case.
We talked @cnni @BeckyCNN pic.twitter.com/E5uPzXyn04
— Norm Eisen (norm.eisen on thread) (@NormEisen) March 4, 2024
Several legal analysts rejected Eisen’s claims.
That’s a bad interpretation. Of course, the Court found it unnecessary to take up that issue, as did the unanimous decision of the three liberal justices. *I see nothing in that agreement to support the claim that it “emphasizes” the following findings: (Majority agrees… https://t.co/fbjnoPWVCV
— Ed Whelan (@EdWhelanEPPC) March 4, 2024
The case is Trump vs. AndersonU.S. Supreme Court No. 23-719.
Follow Christina Wong’s X on Breitbart News. society of truth,or Facebook.
