C-SPAN Washington Journal Appearance on the Trump Section 3 Case

Co-blogger Josh Blackman and I debated the case that will be argued before the Supreme Court this morning.

(Joe Ravi/Wikimedia/CC-BY-SA 3.0)

Today, the Supreme Court will hold oral arguments in Trump v. Anderson, the case addressing whether Donald Trump is disqualified from the presidency under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment. Co-blogger Josh Blackman and I discussed and debated the case for almost an hour on C-SPAN's Washington Journal program. As regular readers know, Josh believes the Court should rule Trump is not disqualified, while I think they should rule that he is.

The video is available here. If I can figure out a way to embed it in this post, I will do so. But so far, I have not been able to.

My amicus brief in the case, which argues that disqualification under Section 3 does not require a prior criminal conviction, is available here. I have previously written about other issues related to the Section 3 litigation, most extensively here and here.

Josh's amicus brief (written on behalf of Prof. Seth Barrett Tillman) is available here.

Comments

[Dr. Ed 2]

Breaking News: US Supreme Court proclaims "No Mas" and declares Tulsi Gabbard the winner of November's Presidental Election. Justice Jackson dissents on the grounds that Gabbard is not Black.

[nystateofmind]

Justice Sotomayor dissents with a missive against the Death Penalty. Justice Thomas dissents with a rant against who knows what and proclaims himself the only person who truly knows what the Constitution actually says.

[Stepped Reckoner]

Justice Kagan dissents, claiming that she finds the majority’s arguments “confusing” and “do[es]n’t understand” them even though she understands them perfectly.

Chief Justice Roberts files a opinion, Sections II, IV-B, IV-D.1, V, VI-C.ii-iii, and VII of which are the opinion of the Court, holding that the November election is a tax.

Justice Kavanaugh, the fifth and deciding vote in the 5-4 case, files a “concurring” opinion setting forth a completely different test than the majority.

[SRG2]

Justice Gorsuch files a dissenting opinion holding that most of the US falls under native American sovereignty per sundry 19thC treaties still legally valid.

[Darth Buckeye]

Will the audio of the oral arguments be released today? If so, where?

[David Nieporent]

At the Supreme Court's website.

[CindyF]

Based upon the oral arguments this morning and the justice's questions, I think Josh's position is going to prevail.

[Doug Heffernan]

I tried to post the code to embed the video. But there is some security block that prevents posting of the actual embed code.

Here's the link used within the embed code:
https://www.c-span.org/video/standalone/?533247-3

[John Rohan]

Doesn't seem to be going well for those who want to ban Trump.

[Commenter_XY]

I think we know who had the better of the debate. 🙂