Progressives bashed the Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling that states could not disqualify former President Donald Trump from appearing on the 2024 presidential ballot, with some even suggesting that the court be “dissolved.”
In a historic ruling, the Supreme Court said only Congress can disqualify a federal candidate from the ballot using the Fourteenth Amendment’s “Insurrection Clause.” The ruling — which comes right before Super Tuesday — overturned a 4-3 opinion from the Colorado Supreme Court in December that banned Trump from appearing on the ballot.
Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold (D-CO) said in a post on X she was “disappointed”: I am disappointed in the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision stripping states of the authority to enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment for federal candidates. Colorado should be able to bar oath-breaking insurrections [sic] from our ballot.
I am disappointed in the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision stripping states of the authority to enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment for federal candidates. Colorado should be able to bar oath-breaking insurrections from our ballot.
— Jena Griswold (@JenaGriswold) March 4, 2024
However, other reactions were more unhinged.
Keith Olbermann, a former sportscaster and political commentator, slammed even progressives on the court and called for the Supreme Court to be “dissolved.” He posted on X: The Supreme Court has betrayed democracy. Its members including Jackson, Kagan and Sotomayor have proved themselves inept at reading comprehension. And collectively the “court” has shown itself to be corrupt and illegitimate.
The Supreme Court has betrayed democracy. Its members including Jackson, Kagan and Sotomayor have proved themselves inept at reading comprehension. And collectively the "court" has shown itself to be corrupt and illegitimate.
— Keith Olbermann⌚️ (@KeithOlbermann) March 4, 2024
It must be dissolved.
CNN’s Dana Bash in a segment called it “unfortunate for America.”
WATCH: CNN’s DANA BASH on the Supreme Court’s 9-0 decision reversing Colorado's move to remove Donald Trump from the ballot:
— Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) March 4, 2024
“Unfortunately for America, the Court isn’t necessarily wrong that this is the way the Framers wanted it to be. They wanted Congress, the people who are… pic.twitter.com/ilpVcQA0n0
CNN legal analyst Norm Eisen criticized the Supreme Court for making the decision right before Super Tuesday, “putting wind in Trump’s sails,” instead of last week.
If I were on SCOTUS, I would have ruled earlier on the 14A case
— Norm Eisen (norm.eisen on Threads) (@NormEisen) March 4, 2024
The short window between the decision & Super Tuesday risks the Court appearing political by putting the wind in Trump's sails right before primary voters go to the polls
I explained @cnni @BeckyCNN pic.twitter.com/5tZjRkgt60
He and other liberals argued that the Supreme Court did not “explicitly deny” that Trump was “an insurrectionist.”
“In a sense, they have left the question open for the criminal authorities and for the American people what to do about Donald Trump’s allegedly criminal conduct,” he argued.
SCOTUS could have expressly reversed Colorado's finding that Trump was an insurrectionist - but they didnt
— Norm Eisen (norm.eisen on Threads) (@NormEisen) March 4, 2024
That has big implications for the pending criminal cases against him & for November
I discussed @cnni @BeckyCNN pic.twitter.com/E5uPzXyn04
Several legal analysts dismissed Eisen’s assertion.
Bad take. Of course the per curiam found it unnecessary to address that issue, *as did the concurrence in the judgment by the three liberal justices.* I see nothing in that concurrence that supports the claim that it "emphasizes" finding below. (Concurrence objects that majority… https://t.co/fbjnoPWVCV
— Ed Whelan (@EdWhelanEPPC) March 4, 2024
The case is Trump v. Anderson, No. 23-719 in the Supreme Court of the United States.
Follow Breitbart News’s Kristina Wong on ”X”, Truth Social, or on Facebook.
