E-mail:
Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at yahoo.com
Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at yale.edu
Ian Ayres ian.ayres at yale.edu
Corey Brettschneider corey_brettschneider at brown.edu
Mary Dudziak mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu
Joey Fishkin joey.fishkin at gmail.com
Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu
Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu
Mark Graber mgraber at law.umaryland.edu
Stephen Griffin sgriffin at tulane.edu
Jonathan Hafetz jonathan.hafetz at shu.edu
Jeremy Kessler jkessler at law.columbia.edu
Andrew Koppelman akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu
Marty Lederman msl46 at law.georgetown.edu
Sanford Levinson slevinson at law.utexas.edu
David Luban david.luban at gmail.com
Gerard Magliocca gmaglioc at iupui.edu
Jason Mazzone mazzonej at illinois.edu
Linda McClain lmcclain at bu.edu
John Mikhail mikhail at law.georgetown.edu
Frank Pasquale pasquale.frank at gmail.com
Nate Persily npersily at gmail.com
Michael Stokes Paulsen michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com
Deborah Pearlstein dpearlst at yu.edu
Rick Pildes rick.pildes at nyu.edu
David Pozen dpozen at law.columbia.edu
Richard Primus raprimus at umich.edu
K. Sabeel Rahmansabeel.rahman at brooklaw.edu
Alice Ristroph alice.ristroph at shu.edu
Neil Siegel siegel at law.duke.edu
David Super david.super at law.georgetown.edu
Brian Tamanaha btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu
Nelson Tebbe nelson.tebbe at brooklaw.edu
Mark Tushnet mtushnet at law.harvard.edu
Adam Winkler winkler at ucla.edu
A Supreme Court
deciding on political grounds alone would be at least as inclined to disqualify
former President Donald Trump as allow him to remain on the ballot in all fifty
states.A judicial decision declaring Trump ineligible for present and future offices in the United States because he
engaged in an insurrection after taking an oath of office might strengthen the
Roberts Court’s appearance of bipartisanship, weaken opposition to courts among
Democrats, enable the Republican Party to nominate a candidate with more appeal
to independents, forestall violence, and rid American politics of a particularly despicable figure.Marty Lederman has ably described the
political reasons why the Supreme Court might want to avoid disqualification.The following sets out the at very least equally compelling political reasons that might encourage the court
to disqualify Trump.The precise weight
of these reasons and the extent to which the Court will rely on more political
than legal reasons, of course, are anyone’s guess.
Disqualifying
Donald Trump would be a coup for the Chief Justice’s public relations
campaign.What better way to prove that
there are no Trump justices or Obama/Biden justices then for the court to disqualify
the former forty-fifth president. By invoking Section Three against Donald Trump, Justices
Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch, and Amy Coney Barrett would silence forever
claims that they are tools of the president who appointed them.The
justices would demonstrate that originalism and textualism are neutral
principles of law and not vehicles for imparting partisan preferences by
interpreting Section Three consistently with the meaning of “engage in insurrection”
in 1866 and booting Donald Trump out of the presidential campaign. Political science textbooks would have to be rewritten while law professors jeered at social scientists who did not understand the rule of law.
Disqualifying
Donald Trump would boost support for the court among the constituencies most likely
to interfere with judicial independence in the near future.Center-left Democrats angry with judicial
rulings in abortion, affirmative action, administration agency, religion and
other cases would be mollified to some degree by a judicial ruling disqualifying
Donald Trump.The new narrative would be
that while this court leans to the right, the judicial majority will vote
against Republicans when text and law is clear. Law matters, which is all one can ask of a court. Of course, many (hardly all) Republicans will be upset if Trump is
disqualified.Still, no Republican with
any sense in Congress is going to move to weaken a court that has done more
than any institution in the past twenty years to advance a conservative
constitutional agenda. Is Ted Cruz really going to impeach John Roberts while Biden is president? Getting rid of
Donald Trump is a small price to pay for the weakening of the administrative
state, increased religious access to governing largess, greater rights to
discriminate against persons of color and sexual minorities, and other Republican
agenda items.
Disqualifying
Donald Trump would come at very little costs for Republicans.Many polls show Governor Nikki Haley running
as well if not better against President Joseph Biden than Trump.Many Trump voters have indicated they will
abandon the former president if he is convicted in one of his many criminal
trials.Haley does not present that
risk. Republicans who want Republican policies should cheer any move that gets the political incompetent Trump off the ballot. President Haley is likely better able than President Trump to achieve conservative
goals, given that her administration is unlikely to be described as malevolence
tempered by incompetence.
Republicans will
have an incentive to clamp down on violence if Trump is disqualified in March
2024 rather than in the fall.Haley and
others have substantial incentives to prevent Republican violence should Trump
be disqualified in the near future. They need the independent voters turned off by violent protestors in the streets. Those incentives are substantially less the later in the election season
Trump is disqualified.
Finally,
Republican judges may feel Trump is a despicable character who should be
disqualified given any excuse.Can you
blame them?
How the court will balance the political and legal factors is anyone’s guess, particularly because
most political factors are a guess.Lawrence Baum offered a powerful insight when he pointed out that
Supreme Court justices are unlikely to predict the future
consequences of their decisions.For
this reason, he suggested, justices are best off making the decision they think legally best and hope for the best.And
the decision that is legally best, an increasing number of informed
constitutional thinkers are coming to understand, is one that disqualifies
Donald Trump.