Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 5, 2024 - Epoch Times

11:43

Trump Scores Major 9-0 Supreme Court Victory

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	In a massive win for President Trump, just earlier today, the U.S. Supreme Court decided unanimously in his favor and they ruled that individual states cannot bar President Trump from appearing on the ballot.
	And this decision of theirs is extremely timely, given the fact that tomorrow, which is Super Tuesday, two of the states that have attempted to kick President Trump off the ballot, namely Colorado and Maine, will be holding the primary elections.
	However, even though this ruling definitively concluded that states cannot kick Trump off the ballot, well, that actually did not stop the Trump disqualification effort.
	Instead, within hours of this ruling being made public, the effort to get Trump kicked off the ballot simply morphed, going from the state level to the federal level, all, of course, in the name of saving democracy.
	And so, let's go through the details of everything here together.
	To start with, the background of this particular case is that for the past year, across the whole country, you've had these lawsuits being lobbied against President Trump in roughly 35 different states aiming to kick him off the ballot.
	The details of the individual cases differ one from the next, but the basic gist of all of them is that since President Trump quote unquote engaged in an insurrection on January 6th, he should therefore be barred from ever holding office as per the 14th Amendment.
	For general context, here's what the pertinent section of the 14th Amendment says.
	This is section number three.
	Quote, no person shall be a senator or representative in Congress or elector of president and vice president or hold any office, civil or military under the United States or under any state who, having previously taken an oath as a member of Congress or as an officer of the United States or as a member of any state legislature or as an executive having previously taken an oath as a member of Congress or as an officer of the United States or as a member of any state legislature or as an executive or judicial officer of any state to support the Constitution of the United
	Then a little bit further down in the 14th Amendment, you had section five, which said the following, quote, the Congress shall have power to enforce by appropriate legislation the provisions of this article.
	And so in the modern context outside of the Civil War, opponents of President Trump have been making the argument that he was involved in an insurrection and he was involved in the same.
	and therefore, as per the 14th Amendment, he should be barred from serving in any capacity as an officer of the United States.
	And along that line, looking across America, you'll see that 35 different cases have been filed in 26 different states, all looking to get Trump kicked off the ballot in those individual municipalities.
	Now, many of those cases, they have been dismissed.
	However, Three of them have actually succeeded in the states of Colorado, Maine, and Illinois.
	In those three states, some form of a ruling was handed down, kicking Trump off the ballot.
	The Colorado decision was the first among those three, and so that's the case that wound up getting appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
	And the argument that Trump's legal team presented to the U.S. Supreme Court in their appeal, it really avoided the question of whether or not the events of January 6th constituted an insurrection.
	They didn't touch that subject.
	Instead, their argument centered around the question of whether or not individual states have the authority to use the 14th Amendment to kick a federal candidate off the ballot.
	And after hearing arguments from both sides, just earlier today at roughly 10 a.m., the U.S. Supreme Court came back with a decision.
	In a 9-0 unanimous ruling, the justices voted that individual states do not have the authority to use the 14th Amendment to kick federal candidates off their ballot.
	Here is part of what the majority opinion said.
	Quote, Section 3 works by imposing on certain individuals a preventative and severe penalty, disqualification from holding a wide array of offices.
	The Constitution empowers Congress to prescribe how those determinations should be made.
	The relevant provision is Section 5, which enables Congress, subject of course to judicial review, to pass appropriate legislation to enforce the 14th Amendment.
	This case raises the question whether the states, in addition to Congress, may also enforce Section 3.
	We conclude that states may disqualify persons holding or attempting to hold state office, but states have no power under the Constitution to enforce Section 3 with respect to federal offices, especially the presidency.
	Their decision then goes on to explain the rationale for why states can disqualify candidates for state office but not for federal office.
	In our federal system, the national government possesses only limited powers.
	The states and the people retain the remainder.
	Among those retained powers is the power of a state to order the processes of its own governance.
	In particular, the states enjoy sovereign power to prescribe the qualifications of their own officers and the manner of their election.
	Free from external interference, except so far as plainly provided by the Constitution of the United States.
	Although the 14th Amendment restricts state power, nothing in it plainly withdraws from the state this traditional authority.
	And after ratification of the 14th Amendment, states use this authority to disqualify state officers in accordance with state statutes.
	"Such power over governance, however, does not extend to federal office holders and candidates, because federal officers owe their existence and functions to the united voice of the whole, not of a portion of the people.
	Powers over their election and qualifications must be specifically delegated to, rather than reserved by, the states." They then wrote that it is only Congress by passing a piece of legislation saying that this person or these persons violated Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which can invoke that particular authority.
	And as such, the question of whether individual states can kick Trump off the ballot has officially been resolved, making all those dozens of lawsuits across the whole country irrelevant.
	Now, I will mention in passing that while all nine Supreme Court justices agreed that the states do not have this authority, all four of the female Supreme Court justices either wrote or they joined a separate concurring opinion, laying out a different rationale for why they came to that same conclusion.
	Regardless of that, though, the end result is the same, that the states have no authority here, and only Congress at the federal level can choose to designate a person or persons as being disqualified as per the 14th Amendment, which is exactly what began happening almost as soon as this ruling was made public.
	Specifically, opponents of President Trump, seeing that the state-level effort was essentially thwarted, they immediately began a new campaign to getting kicked off the ballot at the federal level.
	For instance, here was an interview that took place with Congressman Jamie Raskin over on CNN hours after the U.S. Supreme Court decision came out.
	I am working with a number of my colleagues, including Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Eric Swalwell, to revive legislation that we had to set up a process by which we could determine that someone who committed insurrection is disqualified by Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
	And the House of Representatives already impeached Donald Trump for participating in insurrection by inciting it.
	So the House has already pronounced upon that.
	Alright, just to pause here for a super quick moment.
	Listen, you already know how bad things are getting in this country, and especially in cities.
	Crime is getting ridiculous, and more and more people are starting to realize that the best way to defend yourself and your family is to conceal carry.
	But one of the biggest mistakes that you can make is getting a holster that's not comfortable.
	It digs in at you, it cuts in your skin, you keep having to adjust it, basically it's a disaster.
	Which is where the sponsor of today's episode comes in.
	Vanish, spelled V-N-S-H, they make some of the best and most comfortable holsters here in America.
	They have thousands of customer reviews saying that it's the most comfortable holster they've ever had.
	In fact, I have one myself, and I can attest that it's very good.
	If it's like 99% of all semi-automatic handguns, you don't need to hook it onto a belt, so you can actually wear it with sweatpants and shorts if you want.
	It lets you adjust it, and so you can carry your gun in multiple different positions.
	And it even has two extra spots for magazines.
	And best of all, right now, Vanish is offering a great deal on their holsters to the viewers of our program.
	Simply head on over to vnsh.com forward slash Roman to check out the deal.
	Just FYI, though, you do have to go to that special page to get the special pricing.
	It's not available on their general website, and also the deal is only available for a short period of time.
	So check them out.
	If you don't like it, by the way, they offer a money-back guarantee, so it's pretty much a no-risk deal.
	Just head on over to VNSH.com forward slash Roman.
	I'll also throw the link down into the description box below.
	Meaning that if they can't kick the leading Republican candidate off the ballot through the state courts, they'll instead try to do it through an act of Congress.
	All, of course, in the name of saving democracy.
	Now, given that Republicans do currently control the House, there is little chance of that working out, but we will keep an eye on this particular effort.
	On the flip side, however, you have President Trump himself, who, as you would imagine, was rather satisfied with the Supreme Court decision.
	Shortly after it was made, he went public with a statement of his own that was televised pretty much on every single TV station.
	Here's a short snippet.
	The decision were very well crafted, and I think it will go a long way toward bringing our country together, which our country needs.
	And they worked long, they worked hard, and frankly, they worked very quickly on something that will be spoken about 100 years from now and 200 years from now.
	Extremely important.
	Essentially, you cannot take somebody out of a race because an opponent would like to have it that way.
	And it has nothing to do with the fact that it's the leading candidate, whether it was the leading candidate or a candidate that was well down On the totem pole, you cannot take somebody out of a race.
	The voters can take the person out of the race very quickly, but a court shouldn't be doing that, and the Supreme Court saw that very well.
	And I really do believe that will be a unifying factor, because while most states were thrilled to have me, there were some that didn't, and they didn't want that for political reasons.
	They didn't want that because of poll numbers, because the poll numbers are very good.
	We're beating President Biden in almost every poll.
	New York Times came out yesterday with a very big poll for us.
	So they didn't like that.
	And you can't do that.
	You can't do what they tried to do.
	And hopefully Colorado, as an example, will unify.
	I know there's tremendous support.
	They brought our support up very strong in Colorado because people in Colorado thought that was a terrible thing that they did.
	And so, there you have it.
	With this win in his pocket, President Trump will now appear on the ballot in all 50 states.
	And all the lawsuits against his ballot access have, overnight, become moot.
	although there's now the federal level to getting kicked off the ballot because this story is, of course, never-ending.
	If you'd like to read the full decision that came out of the U.S. Supreme Court, which I would recommend, it's only 20 pages in length, and the rationale is pretty interesting to follow, if you want to read it, I'll throw a PDF version of it down into the description box below this video if you're the type of person that likes to dig into the weeds.
	And all I ask in return is that as you're making your way down there to the description box, take a super quick detour to smash those like and subscribe buttons, which will quite literally force the YouTube algorithm to share this information out to ever more people.
	And then lastly, if you enjoyed today's content and you're just thinking to yourself, man, I like this content, I just wish Roman would publish more episodes every single week.
	Well, you're in luck, because I do.
	Over on EpicTV, our awesome no-sensitive video platform, I publish anywhere between 1 to 3 exclusive episodes of Facts Matter every single week.
	Usually on topics that are unfortunately too spicy for here on YouTube.
	Things like mRNA vaccine technology, things like election fraud, voter fraud, things like climate science.
	Basically, everything on there is fact-based and properly sourced, just like the episodes here on YouTube.
	Just unfortunately, there's an algorithm here on YouTube that crawls our speech.
	And if we talk about things that are not in line with the agenda, our episodes can get throttled, deleted, and the whole channel can get taken down, which is exactly why we created Epic TV, a platform where we don't have to self-censor.
	If you want to check it out, right now the Epic Times is running a phenomenal promotional sale.
	You can find it right there at the top of the description box below.
	It's 25 cents a week for the whole year, which if you do the math, works itself out to just be a single dollar a month.
	And so if you're looking for a source of honest news, extra Facts Matter episodes every single week, including a huge backlog from the last three years, you can find it all over on the website.
	Again, the link will be right there at the top of the description box below.
	I hope you check it out.
	And then, until next time, I'm your host, Roman, from the Epoch Times.

▲