It appears that every pundit, professional or amateur, has a take on how the U. S. Supreme Court ought to rule in the matter of Mr. Trump's eligibility to run for Federal office. And it seems that every politician, legal scholar or big-name attorney has filed an amicus brief, too.
Here's my advice on finding out how the Justices will rule: wait and see. Maybe they'll issue a majority opinion of such limpid clarity and transcendent insight that everyone who reads it will nod in agreement. Maybe they'll corkscrew their way down paths of legal reasoning so complicated that hardly anybody will be able to follow it. Maybe they'll say he's home free. Maybe they'll say he's O-U-T. Maybe they'll find a way to split the difference. Maybe they'll hem and haw and try to wait until the election is past and the matter is moot.
Nobody knows. Not you, not me, not the most eminent law professor or dedicated Court-watcher.
If I was on the Supreme Court, I'd've denied certiorari without comment and sent out for a late breakfast. Why fish in such turbid waters when you can leave it in the lap of a lower court? But that's just me. Any person who tells you they can read the minds of the Justices is talking nonsense. We'll find out when they decide.
BUILDING A 1:1 BALUN
4 years ago
3 comments:
I'm more interested in what Trump will do should SCOTUS say he can't run. It runs the gamut from potentially amusing if some of his picks go against him, to the potential start of some major civil unpleasantness.
I do hope that the American body politic would be able to move on without too many fireworks, but only time will tell.
A (remarkably nonpartisan) legal expert on NPR this morning expressed the opinion that no matter what happens, we're in for a rocky ride. I hope he's wrong.
In the interest of openness, it was a recent episode of "Consider This."
Post a Comment