Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

US News

Former U.S. Attorney Predicts Supreme Court Will Overturn Colorado’s Ballot Ruling

via The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon on Youtube
This article was originally published at Publications approved for syndication have permission to republish this article, such as Microsoft News, Yahoo News, Newsbreak, UltimateNewswire and others. To learn more about syndication opportunities, visit About Us.

Former assistant U.S. attorney Ty Cobb predicts that the U.S. Supreme Court will unanimously reverse the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision to disqualify Donald Trump from the state’s 2024 ballot.

Cobb believes the case will be handled quickly and could result in a 9-0 Supreme Court ruling in favor of Trump.

The Colorado Supreme Court’s 4-3 verdict to remove Trump from the ballot is based on the 14th Amendment’s “insurrectionist ban,” and the decision is on hold pending an appeal on January 4th. (Trending: FBI Bribery Probe Caught Joe Biden’s Brother On Tape)

“I think this case will be handled quickly,” former assistant U.S. attorney Ty Cobb said.

“I think it could be 9-0 in the Supreme Court for Trump.

“I want to go to Ty Cobb now, the former Trump White House lawyer. So, Ty, 133 pages and then you have the three dissents, which I’m trying to work my way through here, from what you’ve seen, what do you take away?” CNN’s Erin Burnett asked.

“So, I — the way I see this is — is that the Supreme Court has to take this. They can stay the dates in Colorado. They’ll move expeditiously. I was struck by the majority opinion and the amount of verbiage devoted to the sort of strawman arguments,” Cobb said.

“You know, the real key issue in this case is, is Trump an officer of the United States in the context in which that term is used in Article 3 of the 14th Amendment. And in 2010, Chief Justice Roberts explained in Free Enterprise that people don’t vote for officers of the United States.”

“Article 2, ‘officers of the United States’ is commonly understood in the Constitution to refer to appointed officials.”

“And to the extent that the president or the vice president are included as an officer or included within the admonitions of the Constitution, they are typically highlighted, like in the impeachment clause which specifically says president, vice president.”

“So I think this case will be handled quickly. I think it could be 9-0 in the Supreme Court for Trump.”

“Can I just say, Ty, that would be — I don’t ever like about who appointed whom because you like to just believe in the impartiality of justice, but nonetheless it has become important,” Burnett said.

“And as Trump is already pointing out, ‘Oh, the Colorado Supreme Court, they were all appointed by Democrats,’ okay, sure. It was a 4-3 ruling. They didn’t all rule against you.”

“Supreme Court, when we often hear about how politicized it is — and I know we’re looking into the distance here, but if you’re looking at 9-0, that would sure be a statement.”

“Yeah. So, I do believe it could be 9-0 because the law is therein. And as you’ll recall, I was once an advocate of this position and there have been multiple law review articles, the most prominent by Bill Boyd and his colleague,” Cobb said.

“I was on a panel with Professor Boyd at the University of Chicago Institute of Politics discussing this, and I heard his views, and his scholarship is excellent.”

“On the other hand, there are multiple competing scholars who disagree and highlight the point that I just made about the multiple Supreme Court decisions, which are three, that do not conclude that officers as used in the as this context include the president or the vice president.”

“And after — I mean, there have been many Constitution professors — Steve Calabrese of Northwestern probably the most prominent one — who after reading all the scholarship changed his mind. He was originally a supporter of the idea that this outcome was appropriate, but he later concluded, despite his strong feelings against Trump, that Trump would have to be beaten at the ballot box, and I think, sadly, that’s the case.”

“And it will be a race to get there. The Supreme Court, though, will not hesitate to move quickly to this. They know what the stakes are. They know what their responsibility is, and they can delay some of these Colorado dates to the extent that they feel they’re obligated to or have to.”

“Right. And obviously, his name remains on the ballot until they rule one way or the other. That was one of the predicates of the ruling today out of Colorado. You hear the music, Ty. That music is from Trump’s rally in Waterloo, Iowa. He’s there and he’s on stage and right now he’s basking in the music and the crowd, and then he’ll obviously speak,” Burnett said.

“Now, we have this statement, but I think when I just said to David Axelrod that a Republican in another swing state who is dealing with one of these issues is that this ruling would supercharge the extremists. What do you think as he walks out there? Is this something he sees as basically a win in a certain sense?”

“Oh, totally. Oh, totally,” Cobb pressed.

“This vindicates his insistence that this is political conspiracy to interfere with the election and that he’s the target and people shouldn’t tolerate that in America.”

“It’s — it’s doo-dah, but that’s the way he tries to sell this. Now, the reality is he committed these crimes in 2021. Jack Smith’s only been on the job for 13 months at most, so this is — you know, justice has moved relatively speedy. This hasn’t been stalled to attack the election.”

Most Popular:

Devastating News For Hunter Biden After Defying Subpoena

Ousted Democrat Who Filmed Explicit Tape Blames Homophobia

Obama Reveals His Fear For Joe Ahead Of 2024

You May Also Like