WASHINGTON —
Without such congressional legislation, Justice Elena Kagan was among several justices who wanted to know “why a single state should decide who gets to be president of the United States.”Eight of the nine justices suggested that they were open to at least some of the arguments made by Jonathan Mitchell, Trump's lawyer at the Supreme Court. Trump could win his case if the court finds just one of those arguments persuasive.
Mitchell argued that the Capitol riot was not an insurrection and, even if it was, Trump did not participate. It sets up precisely the kind of case that the court likes to avoid, one in which it is the final arbiter of a political dispute. The lawyers for Republican and independent voters who sued to remove Trump's name from the Colorado ballot counter that there is ample evidence that the events of Jan. 6 constituted an insurrection and that Trump incited it. They say it would be absurd to apply Section 3 to everything but the presidency or that Trump is somehow exempt. And the provision needs no enabling legislation, they argue.
The court has signaled it will try to act quickly, dramatically shortening the period in which it receives written briefing and holds arguments in the courtroom.
Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: CBSNews - 🏆 87. / 68 Read more »
Source: NPR - 🏆 96. / 63 Read more »
Source: NBCNews - 🏆 10. / 86 Read more »
Source: cnnbrk - 🏆 393. / 55 Read more »
Source: CBSNews - 🏆 87. / 68 Read more »
Source: CBSNewYork - 🏆 268. / 63 Read more »