My Sun column today is about the brief written for the Supreme Court by Mark Graber, the Maryland law professor whose constitutional expertise helped disqualify from office a New Mexico man who joined the violent attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Graber’s conclusion in the brief — that Donald Trump’s words and actions fit the historic definition of an insurrectionist, strongly suggesting that he, too, should be barred from office.

Graber

On Thursday, the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments in the Colorado case that disqualified Trump from the 2024 ballot in that state. Based on all I’ve read about Section 3, I don’t see how Trump avoids disqualification, but he could. A ruling in his favor will further polarize the electorate and further diminish the court’s credibility, if that’s even possible.
Graber’s brief is very convincing.
And that makes me even more amazed than before with the unwillingness of millions of Americans to believe their own eyes, as evidenced by the results of the January poll conducted for The Washington Post by the Center for Democracy and Civic Engagement at the University of Maryland. To wit:

  • Three years after the Jan. 6 attack, Republicans are more sympathetic to those who stormed the U.S. Capitol and more likely to absolve Donald Trump of responsibility for the attack than they were in 2021.
  • Over a third of Americans still believe Joe Biden’s election was illegitimate. Only about 3 in 10 people who get most of their information from Fox News think Biden won legitimately in 2020.
  • Most Americans, but few Republicans, think Jan. 6 threatened democracy.
  • Fewer than 2 in 10 (18 percent) of Republicans say Jan. 6 protesters were “mostly violent,” dipping from 26 percent in 2021.
  • More than 7 in 10 Republicans say that too much is being made of the attack and that it is “time to move on.”

Fortunately, we’re not “moving on.” Trump is not immune from prosecution and the Constitution clearly says that a man who did what he did — instigated and prolonged an insurrection — should be banned from ever holding office again. Unfortunately, these matters are in the hands of the Supreme Court, with its conservative majority and three justices nominated by the worst president in history.

Discover more from Dan Rodricks

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Unknown's avatar

Published by Dan Rodricks

Dan Rodricks is a former long-time columnist for The Baltimore Sun, winner of numerous national and regional journalism awards, a radio and TV personality, podcaster and fly angler. His narrative memoir, "Father's Day Creek," was published in May 2019 by Apprentice House at Loyola University Maryland.

5 thoughts on “In brief: Trump is an insurrectionist, and we can’t just “move on,” as Republicans would like”

  1. Thank you for this. A few weeks ago I called around to various MD State Government offices to find who to contact as I was interested in signing on to any court case MD would attempt to file concerning the 14th Amendment. Even our AG office, their AG on call, said first he heard of it ? and maybe call elections office. I did, got no reply, just VM. Then I read our SOS put him on our ballots and used the criteria “following what the press has reported?” as justification to allow it? Dumbest “law” I have ever heard of. This rule or law needs to be changed. I would have gladly added my name to the case. But at least yesterday the DC Circuit denied his forever immunity case and added he was liable for the J6 prosecution. Yet the GQP Clown House has written up a resolution sponsored by Gaetz and Stefanik declaring he was not an insurrectionist. They just will not give up. But hopefully the Courts will prove all of them wrong. Our Democracy depends on it. has now written some AbFabVintage

    >

    Like

    Reply

  2. The right and correct thing for the Supreme Court to do is more than likely not what they will do because the Leonard Leo lackeys do exactly what they were put there to do.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  3. This will be a test for the SCOTUS for sure. An historical note: President Nixon, back in the Watergate days, claimed that executive privilege allowed him not to turn over certain information to the special prosecutor. Ultimately, the SCOTUS, in a unanimous opinion, ruled against Nixon. Three of the justices who ruled against Nixon (Burger, Blackmun, and Powell) were appointed by Nixon. The decision was in 1974, so this year is the 50th anniversary of that decision.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  5. Amen, Dan.
    The guy has been found in court to have incited violence against the US gov’t; SCOTUS seems to fear the violence he will incite if he is disqualified, so they gutlessly will not hold him accountable. I suspect they will try to level the scales by denying his insane claim of total immunity, and we’re supposed to be thankful for that!

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

Leave a comment