Firebrand Leftist Jamie Raskin Said Congress Must ‘Disqualify’ Trump, Predicted ‘Civil War Conditions’

"So it’s going to be up to us on Jan. 6, 2025 to tell the rampaging Trump mobs that he’s disqualified," far left Rep. Jamie Raskin said.

Supreme Court unanimously SHAMES leftists with Trump 14th Amendment ruling



Democrats and the mainstream media have spent the last few months trying to convince the American people that Colorado has every right to kick former president Donald Trump off the 2024 ballot.

But the Supreme Court isn’t having it.

The Court ruled 9-0 that Colorado can’t use Article 3 of the 14th Amendment to remove Trump from the ballot.

Glenn Beck and Stu Burguiere are pleased but note that the court may still have left Democrats an option.

“The only way this can be implemented is by legislation of Congress,” Stu explains. “They kind of leave it open as to what federal powers could be utilized there.”

In order to get Trump off the ballot, Congress would have to pass a law saying that he engaged in an insurrection and therefore should be removed.

“You can’t do that right now because the House belongs to the Republicans,” Glenn says, adding, “I wouldn’t rule anything out. A dog-faced alien could come down and take over the White House on January 7 and I would be like, 'Well, didn’t see it coming, but mhm, makes sense.'”

According to Stu, the Democrats have even more options.

“Let’s just say Donald Trump wins the presidential election and the Democrats hold the Senate and turn over the House. That new Congress takes seat on January 3, you’ll note a couple days before January 6,” Stu explains.

“And then, all they have to do is vote and say he was an agent of insurrection and therefore cannot be president of the United States,” Glenn agrees.


Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Supreme Court Unanimously SHAMES Leftists With Its Trump 14th Amendment Ruling

Supreme Court Unanimously SHAMES Leftists With Its Trump 14th Amendment Ruling

SCOTUS unanimously reverses Colorado court's decision to remove Trump from ballot



The Democratic-appointed justices on Colorado's Supreme Court ruled 4-3 in December that former President Donald Trump engaged in an insurrection on Jan. 6, is ineligible to be president, and cannot therefore appear on the ballot in the state. In the months since, Maine and Illinois have similarly disqualified the Republican front runner prompting Trump's legal team to file appeals.

The U.S Supreme Court issued a timely opinion Monday morning, one day ahead of the Republican primaries in Maine and Colorado: "Because the Constitution makes Congress, rather than the States, responsible for enforcing Section 3 against federal officeholders and candidates, we reverse."

This decision will undoubtedly impact efforts in other states by activists groups to disenfranchise their fellow voters and spare President Joe Biden from facing his top rival in the upcoming election.

Quick background

Six petitioners backed by a Democrat-aligned group sued in September 2023 to have Trump removed from Colorado ballots. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington brought the case on behalf of the Colorado voters.

CREW, a partisan activist group that fancies itself as a government watchdog, was optimized as an attack dog for the Democratic Party by Media Matters founder David Brock in advance of the 2016 election. The Colorado initiative was executed under CREW's current president Noah Bookbinder, up until recently a member of the Biden Department of Homeland Security's Homeland Security Advisory Council.

According to the petitioners, Section 3 of the 14th Amendment concerning insurrection applies to the president, in this case, Trump, and the Republican's actions on Jan. 6, 2021, qualified.

Claiming it did "not reach these conclusions lightly," the state court's majority determined that Trump had "engaged in" insurrection; that Section 3 applies to the presidency; and that Trump's Jan. 6 speech at the Ellipse was not protected by the First Amendment.

Blaze News previously noted that Trump's legal team, which appealed the ruling, has argued that:

  • "Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits individuals only from holding office[.] ... It does not prevent anyone from running for office, or from being elected to office, because Congress can remove a section 3 disqualification at any time";
  • The Colorado Supreme Court violated the Electors Clause by "flouting the statutes governing presidential elections";
  • Trump did not engage in insurrection;
  • Seciton 3 is inapplicable to the presidency; and
  • Congress is the proper body to "resolve questions concerning a presidential candidate's eligibility," not a partisan state court.

According to its Monday per curiam, the U.S. Supreme Court evidently agrees with Trump's legal team on this final bullet.

The high court puts Colorado in check

The Supreme Court noted that Congress is empowered by the Constitution to pass "appropriate legislation" to "enforce" the Fourteenth Amendment, but that states enjoy no such power in the case of national elections.

"We conclude that States may disqualify persons holding or attempting to hold state office," wrote the court. "But States have no power under the Constitution to enforce Section 3 with respect to federal offices, especially the Presidency."

"This can hardly come as a surprise, given that the substantive provisions of the Amendment 'embody significant limitations on state authority,'" continued the high court. "Under the Amendment, States cannot abridge privileges or immunities, deprive persons of life, liberty, or property without due process, deny equal protection, or deny male inhabitants the right to vote. ... On the other hand, the Fourteenth Amendment grants new power to Congress to enforce the provisions of the Amendment against the States."

All nine members of the court agreed that the Colorado Supreme Court's decision "cannot stand."

Justice Amy Coney Barrett noted that the "Court has settled a politically charged issue in the volatile season of a Presidential election. ... For present purposes, our differences are far less important than our unanimity: All nine Justices agree on the outcome of this case. That is the message Americans should take home."

Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson indicated in their concurring opinion that allowing Colorado to unilaterally remove a presidential candidate is unfit as a candidate in a national election would "create a chaotic state-by-state patchwork, at odds with our Nation's federalism principles."

The liberal justices took issue, however, with the majority's announcement that a "disqualification for insurrection can occur only when Congress enacts a particular kind of legislation pursuant to Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment," noting that in doing so, "the majority shuts the door on other potential means of federal enforcement."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Justice Alito contemplates in thinly veiled hypothetical whether Biden could be taken off ballots for aiding Iran



Justice Samuel Alito hinted Thursday that former President Donald Trump's removal from the ballot in Colorado could spell trouble for President Joe Biden.

Jason Murray, the lawyer for the six voters seeking to preclude their fellow Americans from voting for Trump in the Centennial State, attempted to make the disqualification case Thursday to the U.S. Supreme Court. It did not go well.

Conservative and leftist justices alike poked holes in Murray's arguments concerning the alleged application of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to presidents and Trump's corresponding disqualification.

In addition to demonstrating that Murray's arguments were wanting — arguments endorsed in December by the Democratic appointees on the Colorado Supreme Court — the U.S. Supreme Court highlighted significant implications of a Trump disqualification that may come back to bite Democrats and further destabilize the Union.

Justice Samuel Alito contemplated whether the application of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to presidents might pave the way for states to remove a president such as Joe Biden if accused of giving "aid or comfort to the enemies" of the United States.

"Suppose there is a country that proclaims again and again and again that the United States is its biggest enemy," said Alito. "And suppose that the president of the United Sates, for diplomatic reasons, thinks that it is in the best interest of the United States to provide funds or release funds so that they can be used by that country."

"Could a state determine that that person has given aid and comfort to the enemy and therefore keep that person off of the ballot?" asked Alito.

Iran routinely threatens the United States.

The regime's minister of defense said in November that if the U.S. did not implement a ceasefire in Gaza, it would "be hit hard," reported Reuters.

Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi vowed in September to take revenge on the Americans who ordered and engaged in the assassination of Iranian terrorist Qassim Suleimani.

Despite such threats, indications that Iran was involved in the Oct. 7 terror attacks on Israel, and warnings from Republicans that the Iranian regime could use the money to increase its funding of Hamas, Hezbollah, and Houthi terrorists, the Biden administration released $6 billion in frozen assets to Iran.

Murray answered Alito in the negative, saying, "This court has never interpreted the aid-and-comfort language, which also is present in the Treason Clause. But commentators have suggested — it's been rarely applied because treason prosecutions are so rare — but commentators have suggested that, first of all, that aid and comfort really only applies in the context of a declared war or at least an adversarial relationship where there is in fact a war."

The U.S. executed scores of airstrikes earlier this month on Iran-backed terrorist groups, which might also indicate an adversarial relationship.

Conservative commentator Larry Kudlow argued last week that by sponsoring 166 attacks against U.S. military assets, the regime has effectively declared war against the U.S. 166 times.

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito smacks Joe Biden during Donald Trump's 14th Amendment Case before SCOTUS.\n\n"Suppose there is a country that proclaims again and again and again that the United States is its biggest enemy, and suppose that the president of the United States for\u2026
— (@)

Alito was not the only Supreme Court justice who contemplated the ramifications of Trump's disqualification and the potential for Section 3 weaponization by partisans.

Roberts suggested that if Colorado's position is upheld, "surely there will be disqualification proceedings on the other side, and some of those will succeed."

"Some of them will have different standards of proof. Some of them will have different rules about evidence," continued Roberts. "In very quick order, I would expect, although my predictions have never been correct, I would expect that a goodly number of states will say whoever the Democratic candidate is, you're off the ballot, and others for the Republican candidate, you're off the ballot."

"It'll come down to just a handful of states that are going to decide the presidential election," said Chief Justice John Roberts. "That's a pretty daunting consequence."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

States Dumping Trump From Ballots Would Spell Disaster For The Republic, And SCOTUS Knows It

The justices had consequences on their minds. It’s hard to escape the disenfranchising effect of letting Colorado — or any other state — boot a presidential candidate from the ballot.

Will Congress Vote Whether Trump Or Biden Can Be President?

There are numerous issues raised in the case to be heard by the Supreme Court on if former President Donald Trump can be elected as president in light of the 14th Amendment.

Meet The Two Groups Behind Plot To Kick Trump Off The Ballot (And He Isn’t The Only Target)

CREW and the banal-sounding Free Speech for People are leading the campaign to take Trump down with a bogus reading of the 14th Amendment’s 'insurrection clause.'

Liberal group files lawsuit in Colorado to keep Trump off the GOP primary ballot and 'any future election ballot'



A liberal activist group based in Washington, D.C., that claims to want to "shore up our democracy against attacks" is working to keep President Joe Biden's top rival off the ballot in Colorado for the 2024 election.

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a group that has been called a "lapdog to left-leaning politicians" and has sought to hamstring former President Donald Trump since 2016, filed a lawsuit Wednesday in Denver District Court on behalf of six purported Republican and unaffiliated Colorado voters. The suit demands that Trump be removed from the GOP primary ballot and "any future election ballot" for supposedly having "disqualified himself from public office by violating Section 3 of the 14th Amendment."

CREW alleged in a statement that Trump, now leading Biden in CNN's latest general election poll, violated his oath to preserve and defend the Constitution "by recruiting, inciting and encouraging a violent mob that attacked the Capitol on January 6, 2021 in a futile attempt to remain in office."

The 115-page suit, which regurgitates Jan. 6 committee talking points and appears to cite Trump's recent indictments as supporting evidence for his ineligibility, names Colorado's Democratic Secretary of State Jena Griswold as a defendant. According to the complaint, Griswold should already have excluded Trump from the primary ballot.

Griswold — who happens to have beaten the daughter of one of the petitioners in an election for her current role — responded to the suit, stating, "I look forward to the Colorado Court’s substantive resolution of the issues, and am hopeful that this case will provide guidance to election officials on Trump’s eligibility as a candidate for office."

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R), who has similarly been met with requests to remove Trump from the ballot ahead of the 2024 election, has suggested that doing so in his state or elsewhere would "only reinforce the grievances of those who see the system as rigged and corrupt," further underscoring in the Wall Street Journal that "denying voters the opportunity to choose is fundamentally un-American."

"Invoking the 14th Amendment is merely the newest way of attempting to short-circuit the ballot box," wrote Raffensperger. "Mr. Trump might win the nomination and general election. Or he could lose. The outcomes should be determined by the people who show up to make their preference known in primaries (including Georgia’s on March 12) and the general election on Nov. 5. A process that denies voters their chance to be the deciding factor in the nomination and election process would erode the belief in our uniquely American representative democracy."

The Associated Press noted that whereas various "fringe figures" across the country have sued in vain citing the clause, the legal resources behind this latest effort are substantial. The firms Tierney Lawrence Stiles LLC, KBN Law LLC, and Olson Grimsley Kawanabe Hinchcliff & Murray LLC are representing this play.

Among the petitioners named in the suit are Norma Anderson, Michelle Priola, Claudine (Cmarada) Schneider, and Krista Kafer.

Anderson, an on-again, off-again Republican from Lakewood, served in the state House from 1987 until 1998, then served in the state Senate from 1999 to 2005. She is the mother of failed Colorado secretary of state candidate Pam Anderson.

Priola is the wife of Democratic state Sen. Kevin Priola.

Schneider is a former Republican U.S. representative from Rhode Island.

Krista Kafer is a Never-Trumper Denver Post opinion writer, according to KMGH-TV.

While seeking to eliminate the sitting president's opposition from contention, CREW president Noah Bookbinder said, "If the very fabric of our democracy is to hold, we must ensure that the Constitution is enforced and the same people who attacked our democratic system not be put in charge of it."

Bookbinder, like CREW, is hardly nonpartisan. In addition to obsessing about Trump in the pages of the Washington Post, he is ostensibly tight with the ruling power. He was appointed by Biden's Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to the DHS Advisory Council in March 2022. Influence Watch noted that in his previous capacity as chief counsel for criminal justice for the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, Bookbinder worked in support of Senate Democrats to support their leftist agenda.

"We aren’t bringing this case to make a point, we’re bringing it because it is necessary to defend our republic both today and in the future," continued Bookbinder. "While it is unprecedented to bring this type of case against a former president, January 6th was an unprecedented attack that is exactly the kind of event the framers of the 14th Amendment wanted to build protections in case of. You don’t break the glass unless there’s an emergency."

CREW has asked the court to expedite the anti-democratic motion so that Trump can be stricken from the ballot before it is set on Jan. 5, 2024, reported the Associated Press.

Donald Sherman, CREW's chief counsel, told reporters, "We understand that there’s great interest in states across this country about this question, and it needs to be resolved expeditiously so there’s clarity."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!