Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

Politics

Tribe: SCOTUS Did a ‘Favor’ for ‘Oath-Breaking Insurrectionists’

via MSNBC
This article was originally published at StateOfUnion.org. 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.

Harvard Law professor Laurence Tribe criticized the Supreme Court for unanimously overturning a Colorado Supreme Court ruling that disqualified former President Donald Trump, calling it a “favor” to Trump.

Tribe argued that the Supreme Court should have upheld the Colorado court’s decision based on ample evidence presented in a fair trial, rather than potentially allowing chaos by not disqualifying an “oath-breaking insurrectionist.”

“You should exercise it by reviewing the decision of the Colorado Supreme Court, carefully reasoning the elaborate explanation of why what happened in this case was an insurrection and why Donald Trump engaged in it. Based on a trial who’s fairness not a single one of the nine justices questioned in which Donald Trump had ample opportunity to present evidence,” Tribe said.

Tribe emphasized that the Supreme Court’s decision sets a negative precedent and undermines the Constitution’s protection against office holding by such individuals.

“So all of the Supreme Court needed to do to avoid allowing any one state to impose a rule on the nation or to impose what it thought would be chaos to 50 different states going 50 different ways was to remember something that this court normally emphasizes, it is the Supreme Court of the United States,” he said.

“All they have had to do was affirm the decision of the Colorado court, saying there is ample evidence here in a trial which was fully fair and applied constitutionally appropriate standards, ample evidence to disqualify this oath breaking insurrectionist,” Tribe said.

He added, “In other words, they could’ve gone in either of two directions and there’s only one possible region reason for going in the direction they did. That was that they were doing a favor to oath breaking insurrectionists, in particular, one Donald J. Trump. That is not the way a court should behave.”

“Yes, in a 100 years from now, that is still going to be a lesson in how court should not decide cases. It will be a lesson in how a court by a 5-to-4 decision can fundamentally destroy the Constitution’s deliberate protection against office holding by oath breaking insurrectionists.”

Most Popular:

FBI Informant Who Criticized Biden Gets Bad News

Drag Queen Principal Learns His Fate Amid Controversy

You May Also Like

Trending