0
0.0
Mar 5, 2024
03/24
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
supreme court keeps trump on ballot. states cannot borrow gop front-runner over his role in the capital attack. here's the washington times. unanimous ruling to keep trump on the ballot. states have no power in federal elections. the washington post. supreme court keeps trump on ballot nationwide. usa today. 9-0, supreme court keeps trump on ballot. other states cannot invoke insurrection clause. here is the new york times. justices rule 9-0.ru colorado loses the case. while you are dialing in we will speak to a reporter with the wall street journal, jess freeman. welcome to the program. questions did the supreme court rule on yesterday? guest: there were a number of arguments donald trump raised in his appeal. the supreme court honed in on one of them, which is only congress can enforce section 3 of the 14th amendment which bars former officials who engage in insurrection or rebellion from public office. the supreme court said only congress can set out the rules for enforcing the provision against a federal candidate an
supreme court keeps trump on ballot. states cannot borrow gop front-runner over his role in the capital attack. here's the washington times. unanimous ruling to keep trump on the ballot. states have no power in federal elections. the washington post. supreme court keeps trump on ballot nationwide. usa today. 9-0, supreme court keeps trump on ballot. other states cannot invoke insurrection clause. here is the new york times. justices rule 9-0.ru colorado loses the case. while you are dialing in...
0
0.0
Mar 28, 2024
03/24
by
CSPAN3
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
he was working as an aide at the supreme court in library. and so the day after pearl harbor day on december 8th, 1941, he was doing what a library aide does dropping off books, picking up books. and all of a sudden the front door, he saw all of these u.s. army soldiers come with their weapons drawn and take positions at the windows and the roof all around the court. and the reason was because at noon that day fdr was going to be at the capitol, right across the street from the supreme court. that's where he gave his famous day of infamy speech. that december 7th is a date which will live in infamy. and in fact, the justices adjourned early. so that they could go there and be there. and the soldiers were there as part of an expanded security perimeter. this was just one day after this devastating surprise attack in pearl harbor. but what you see is quite literally, the war, the quiet prison of the supreme court. and the second anecdote was the day after christmas, 1941, and winston churchill had made this dramatic surprise by his visit to was
he was working as an aide at the supreme court in library. and so the day after pearl harbor day on december 8th, 1941, he was doing what a library aide does dropping off books, picking up books. and all of a sudden the front door, he saw all of these u.s. army soldiers come with their weapons drawn and take positions at the windows and the roof all around the court. and the reason was because at noon that day fdr was going to be at the capitol, right across the street from the supreme court....
0
0.0
Mar 31, 2024
03/24
by
CSPAN2
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
and the supreme court in particular. and that every year through the eighties, even through the nineties, under chief justice rehnquist and it continues for four years under john roberts and in thousand and nine, roberts stops he stops asking congress for anything because if you ask congress for stuff you, convey the message that actually congress give and congress can take away. and so to me, again, like the notion that the supreme court has the power of judicial review is not new. the notion that the court might abuse that power in ways that are deeply unpopular is not new. what is missing today are the bricks that actually used to keep the court not completely in line with public, but at least loosely in line with public opinion. and i think that's the real problem, that if we just look at the decisions the courts handed down, we tend to miss. i just want to add an anecdote of my own that supports what you said when chief justice warren got the court together to decide brown versus the board, he said no dissents and i
and the supreme court in particular. and that every year through the eighties, even through the nineties, under chief justice rehnquist and it continues for four years under john roberts and in thousand and nine, roberts stops he stops asking congress for anything because if you ask congress for stuff you, convey the message that actually congress give and congress can take away. and so to me, again, like the notion that the supreme court has the power of judicial review is not new. the notion...
0
0.0
Mar 6, 2024
03/24
by
CSPAN2
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
because of the many, many trump cases the supreme court is hearing. this would seem pretty clear the court was going to go into this ral argument and it was also the consensus of many observers of the court.llowed each state to make this kind of determination were pretty severe. the same can of the supre court majority could be qualified inat some states. not qualified in others. even based on the same records. this is not a shocker. three liberal justices a concurring opinion can you explain what the argument was? >> sure. to use the sometimes exotic and nomenclature all nine agree with the judgment. but not the opinion. they're only five who agreed with the majority was unsigned. we know who they were because we know who they are. process of elimination of it being a majority. three liberal justices jointly authored an opinion that itially, according to what some indications with a partial dissent because somebody and noted the metadata on the document the supreme court published use the word dissenting to refer to opinions that's not what is said w
because of the many, many trump cases the supreme court is hearing. this would seem pretty clear the court was going to go into this ral argument and it was also the consensus of many observers of the court.llowed each state to make this kind of determination were pretty severe. the same can of the supre court majority could be qualified inat some states. not qualified in others. even based on the same records. this is not a shocker. three liberal justices a concurring opinion can you explain...
0
0.0
Mar 2, 2024
03/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
the supreme court dealt with that after he was not incarcerated before the supreme court process. this is a way early to delay it, and so jason, i turn to you, our lonely nation turns to you. not because you have practice law as long as david kelly, or prosecuted as many tough cases as david kelly. or, run the southern district of new york like david kelly, who azar my people as my former boss. but jason, because i wonder whether the supreme court is acting in a way, that will ultimately be deemed by the evidence to look more partisan and legal, and what are your political thoughts on that? >> it's absolute partisan. this is garbage. and honestly ari, i think the public at large, and democrats in the white house. and frankly, elena kagan, and ketanji brown jackson, and sonia sotomayor, should be standing up and screaming right now. this is an absolute disgusting abuse of power. and let me make this clear for the non lawyers out there. because i have -- the one lawyer who's here. i'm explaining this, i'm on campus right. it's like explaining this case to my students today. and they
the supreme court dealt with that after he was not incarcerated before the supreme court process. this is a way early to delay it, and so jason, i turn to you, our lonely nation turns to you. not because you have practice law as long as david kelly, or prosecuted as many tough cases as david kelly. or, run the southern district of new york like david kelly, who azar my people as my former boss. but jason, because i wonder whether the supreme court is acting in a way, that will ultimately be...
0
0.0
Mar 4, 2024
03/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
thing for the supreme court. the approval levels of the court poll at historic lows. 41% in a recent poll, approve of the job that the supreme court is doing, and the court's decision to take the immunity case on its regular order rather than on an expedited basis which will result in a significant delay in that case going to trial in washington, d.c., that's a very controversial decision, and it's going to be seen by many people as the court essentially interfering in some sense in the election, and so this is all sort of playing out here in terms of how we assess the supreme court and its legacy. >> lisa, "the new york times" put it very succinctly this morning writing, not since bush v. gore -- george w. bush obviously, and that was the presidency that was handed to bush, but have they had a direct role in a presidential contest. how big a factor is the supreme court in this election? >> obviously it's a huge factor now in states' ability to regulate who was on the presidential primary and general election bal
thing for the supreme court. the approval levels of the court poll at historic lows. 41% in a recent poll, approve of the job that the supreme court is doing, and the court's decision to take the immunity case on its regular order rather than on an expedited basis which will result in a significant delay in that case going to trial in washington, d.c., that's a very controversial decision, and it's going to be seen by many people as the court essentially interfering in some sense in the...
0
0.0
Mar 14, 2024
03/24
by
ESPRESO
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
judges of the supreme court, but it is also a matter of the selection of new judges of the supreme court, because in fact there are currently at least 50 vacancies in the supreme court, so the higher qualification commission can announce a competition for the supreme court, and here it is important that this process takes place not as it happened in the 16th year, because the result is us we see these princes on the bench, more effectively. mrs. kateryna, thank you for participating in our program, you will have a more successful day today, because i confused you with our next guest, so kateryna butko was with us the head of the public council at the national agency for the prevention of corruption and on the prevention of corruption among those who fights corruption, that is, he is a corrupt official in a mantle, we were just talking about time for the news, khrystyna parobiy is already waiting, because the news team has prepared the most recent and most important information for this news. and now we all are we will learn about her. thank you, colleagues, explosions and fires continue
judges of the supreme court, but it is also a matter of the selection of new judges of the supreme court, because in fact there are currently at least 50 vacancies in the supreme court, so the higher qualification commission can announce a competition for the supreme court, and here it is important that this process takes place not as it happened in the 16th year, because the result is us we see these princes on the bench, more effectively. mrs. kateryna, thank you for participating in our...
0
0.0
Mar 4, 2024
03/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
supreme court. 9-0. strong message to follow. >> dana: karl, the one thing i wanted to get your take on is my instincts are telling me this actually gives the biden team maybe a little bit more of a reason to step on the gas and to try to beat president trump on the merits rather than waiting for these left wing ideas on the judicial front to try to stop him from being the nominee. >> yeah, well, probably -- you've given them good advice because they really have, i think, been counting on these extraneous things to bring him down. look, some of these things have taken away his time and energy from the campaign but none of them have seemed to materially damaged his standing with the american electorate. this is what it's all about. getting the hearts and minds of the american people and a lot of people have looked at these things and said some of them give me pause. i want to hear more about them. but some of these seem to me to be over the top and piling on and unfair. and this was the most unfair of all
supreme court. 9-0. strong message to follow. >> dana: karl, the one thing i wanted to get your take on is my instincts are telling me this actually gives the biden team maybe a little bit more of a reason to step on the gas and to try to beat president trump on the merits rather than waiting for these left wing ideas on the judicial front to try to stop him from being the nominee. >> yeah, well, probably -- you've given them good advice because they really have, i think, been...
0
0.0
Mar 3, 2024
03/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
it is the supreme court. and let's not forget, at times they make decisions like when it came to the 2020 election, that the did side on the facts and on the reality that joe biden was in fact elected president. there was some voter fraud. but what concerns me is what you said as far as the trust within the court, it seems to me that i will leave it to the two attorneys on the set to discuss the legal side, >> i wish you were all on set. >> i'm sorry, who are onscreen with me. but my concern is that the had an opportunity to kick this down, because it seems to me every legal scholar i have heard says, they will not grant any president complete immunity. but, they chose not to. and i guess, the only other second bite at the apple, here is how long do they -- to come back with a decision. they have not been, speedy has been talks about late schoon or early july at the end of the session, but maybe just maybe they can surprise us i hope. it is the reputation of the supreme court of the united states, not the 63
it is the supreme court. and let's not forget, at times they make decisions like when it came to the 2020 election, that the did side on the facts and on the reality that joe biden was in fact elected president. there was some voter fraud. but what concerns me is what you said as far as the trust within the court, it seems to me that i will leave it to the two attorneys on the set to discuss the legal side, >> i wish you were all on set. >> i'm sorry, who are onscreen with me. but...
0
0.0
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
the the, this is the, the, the news live from berlin, the us supreme court. hans donald trump, a major victory with wide ranging implications. the justices unanimously rejecting colorado's bid to block the former president from its primary ballot watching similar attempts in other states. also in our program, france puts a woman's right to abortion, into its constitution for worlds 1st intended to prevent any rollback of abortion rights in the future. the hello and welcome to our show. i'm stephen beardsley in berlin. we begin in the us where the supreme court has ruled, but states cannot keep donald trump off the 2024 ballad. unanimous ruling strikes down, colorado's bid to bar trump from its presidential primary duty. his efforts to overturn his 2020 election defeats the states top court, removed him from the ballad in december. so adding a constitutional ban on every insurrection is running for office. supreme court said only congress could enforce that rule. trump has walk in the really i want to start by thanking the supreme court for its unanimous decision. today, it was a very i
the the, this is the, the, the news live from berlin, the us supreme court. hans donald trump, a major victory with wide ranging implications. the justices unanimously rejecting colorado's bid to block the former president from its primary ballot watching similar attempts in other states. also in our program, france puts a woman's right to abortion, into its constitution for worlds 1st intended to prevent any rollback of abortion rights in the future. the hello and welcome to our show. i'm...
0
0.0
Mar 4, 2024
03/24
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
the supreme court? caller: i have not trusted them for a while. even when obama was president, mitch mcconnell would not let him, obama, bring up merrick garland, to bring someone on the court. so the court has become political for a while, not only now. i do not trust the court. i think of our becoming -- i think they are becoming too political. the last three before jackson, i think they have really been too political, and i think the courts now are very, very political. i would give them a 10%. host: that's ann in new york. a favorability ratings are any indication, the supreme court becoming more unfavorable over time, according to public polling. this is pew research with their chart, dating back to 1987. back then, the favorability ratings of the supreme court would bounce from 80% to 65%. you can see those numbers tightening over time, from 2000 7, 2017, almost 50-50, just after 2022, unfavorable ratings then favorable ratings, that dating up last year, and some of the latest numbers from the gal
the supreme court? caller: i have not trusted them for a while. even when obama was president, mitch mcconnell would not let him, obama, bring up merrick garland, to bring someone on the court. so the court has become political for a while, not only now. i do not trust the court. i think of our becoming -- i think they are becoming too political. the last three before jackson, i think they have really been too political, and i think the courts now are very, very political. i would give them a...
0
0.0
Mar 5, 2024
03/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
the supreme court and why? >> because they >> believe that it's inappropriate for one state eight to decide how the rest of essentially the union will be able to operate. but their role is hold on. if i'm in charge of my own state elections than why would i not be in that best position here for my own voters? this is a way i think them to have the off-ramp that she was even herself because of being happening. and here it is, the off-ramp and the supreme court got off at that exit. >> what did you think norm eisen from what we just heard from the colorado secretary of state, well, wealth, their legal issues that reasonable minds can disagree about. i think secretary griswold position that the evidence strongly supported donald trump engaged in insurrection and the fair assessment that that is a threat to the devil i'm a critic. norms of the system. i think here though you can't underestimate the political win for donald trump a nine, nothing unanimous. supreme court decision is just something we saw him do it th
the supreme court and why? >> because they >> believe that it's inappropriate for one state eight to decide how the rest of essentially the union will be able to operate. but their role is hold on. if i'm in charge of my own state elections than why would i not be in that best position here for my own voters? this is a way i think them to have the off-ramp that she was even herself because of being happening. and here it is, the off-ramp and the supreme court got off at that exit....
0
0.0
Mar 4, 2024
03/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
supreme court. we are not all one voice in the united states of america right now. we are divided of. they showed us what it looks like with a purpose and a mission. >> emily: you know what i love about this decision and i have on my hand right here how clear it is pure anyone can read this opinion and understand exactly the logic behind the supreme court unanimous ruling. to your point, what we all expected, this is exactly what the constitution stands for. what i love as well, they're opening life has a come out, the constitution makes congress rather than the states responsible for enforcing section 3 against federal officeholders and candidates we reverse. they go on to explain the 14th amendment expanded federal power at the expense of state economy. this entire decision is saying, look them at the end of the day you are trying to apply something section 3 of the 14th amendment to give the states more power. but that is from congress and ultimately, they say because of the people. we talk about
supreme court. we are not all one voice in the united states of america right now. we are divided of. they showed us what it looks like with a purpose and a mission. >> emily: you know what i love about this decision and i have on my hand right here how clear it is pure anyone can read this opinion and understand exactly the logic behind the supreme court unanimous ruling. to your point, what we all expected, this is exactly what the constitution stands for. what i love as well, they're...
0
0.0
Mar 5, 2024
03/24
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
progressive levels on the supreme court -- liberals on the supreme court. he was never accused of an insurrection. he was never tried. he was never convicted. he said let's go down there peacefully. nancy pelosi turned down his request0 troops to protect the capitol. my only question is, what motivated these justices in colorado and other states to bring about this lawsuit? y perspective if ever there was another vacancy on the supreme court in essence they are raising their hand to say pick me, pick me. i will do any stupid do. host: michael and washington, d.c. -- in washington d.c. caller: i agree with the supreme court ruling 9-0. i'm an educator in washington, d.c. i wish they would bring civics back to the -- we only have history twice a week at high schothe kids are not learning civics. you have to go by the law. a lot of people with their emotions. regardless of the judges being left-wing or whatever, they followed the law. donald trump regardless of how you feel about his rhetoric or whatever cavanaugh told him, he told jack smith get him for insur
progressive levels on the supreme court -- liberals on the supreme court. he was never accused of an insurrection. he was never tried. he was never convicted. he said let's go down there peacefully. nancy pelosi turned down his request0 troops to protect the capitol. my only question is, what motivated these justices in colorado and other states to bring about this lawsuit? y perspective if ever there was another vacancy on the supreme court in essence they are raising their hand to say pick...
0
0.0
Mar 4, 2024
03/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
but laura, that's what the supreme court does. they settled volatile questions of national significance so this quote could come back to haunt her because she goes on to say, particularly in this circumstance, writings on the court should turn the national temperature down, not up, but we know that's not always what supreme court decisions do. so i get what she's saying here. this is a time for consensus. a lot of questions about partisanship and ethics on the supreme court for the good of the country, we should all turn the temperature down, not up, but that, that could come back to haunt her in future decisions when right. she goes against maybe her colleagues goes against the grade of the national consensus on things. so interesting, the chief justice clearly had a lot of work to do behind the scenes to get a consensus here that might explain all so wolf, why it's taken a month to get to this very point in time. now, if you look at look ahead there is another very consequential supreme court or arguments coming at the end of ap
but laura, that's what the supreme court does. they settled volatile questions of national significance so this quote could come back to haunt her because she goes on to say, particularly in this circumstance, writings on the court should turn the national temperature down, not up, but we know that's not always what supreme court decisions do. so i get what she's saying here. this is a time for consensus. a lot of questions about partisanship and ethics on the supreme court for the good of the...
0
0.0
Mar 15, 2024
03/24
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
the supreme court reversed that 9-0. it is very hard to get the supreme court to rule 9-0 on these key cases. there is democrat lawfare and election that even justices taken, sotomayor, and jackson not exactly trump fans, joint in this nine to nothing decision to side with president trump. you are seeing president biden's hands on all four of these unprecedented criminal prosecutions against president trump for non-crimes. it is not a crime to object to a presidential election in america. it is allowed by the electoral count act of 1887. democrats objected to republican wins in 1968, 2000, 2004, 2016. we do not see john kerry and hillary clinton in jail. it is also allowed by the first amendment to object to presidential elections. it is only illegal to object to a presidential election in third world marxist hellholes like zimbabwe and north korea and atlanta and washington d.c. host: you talked about the three justices. they say they protest the majority's efforts to use the case to define the efforts of federal enforc
the supreme court reversed that 9-0. it is very hard to get the supreme court to rule 9-0 on these key cases. there is democrat lawfare and election that even justices taken, sotomayor, and jackson not exactly trump fans, joint in this nine to nothing decision to side with president trump. you are seeing president biden's hands on all four of these unprecedented criminal prosecutions against president trump for non-crimes. it is not a crime to object to a presidential election in america. it is...
0
0.0
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
court decision is so significant today supreme court ruling while it is important to stress that it is still temporary, is definitely significant, as it shifts power to shape, immigration law in the us from the federal to the state level and that head of an election where immigration issues will be front and center of the campaign. and it also reflects the broader trend of the supreme court to give more autonomy to states as opposed to the federal level, which we have seen also in the past couple of years. and that raises questions for the future, about what will lie within the power of the federal government and within the power of the state of the individual states, respectively. okay, so from federal to state, but what is this concretely meaningful for migraines? the law essentially makes illegal immigration at the state level of crime, and that means the state and local police will have the authority to arrest anyone they suspect of having cross the border into texas. the legally, these people could then be charged in a state court and could even be forwarded to return to mexico
court decision is so significant today supreme court ruling while it is important to stress that it is still temporary, is definitely significant, as it shifts power to shape, immigration law in the us from the federal to the state level and that head of an election where immigration issues will be front and center of the campaign. and it also reflects the broader trend of the supreme court to give more autonomy to states as opposed to the federal level, which we have seen also in the past...
0
0.0
Mar 4, 2024
03/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
paula reid at the supreme court. thank you very much joining us now, the colorado secretary of state, jenna griswold, madam secretary thanks so much for joining us. the high court says states don't have the power to remove federal candidates from the ballot. what's your reaction to this historic decision today? >> well, thank you for having me on first and foremost, i'm glad that they issued a decision colorado voters and american voters all across the country deserve to know whether donald trump is qualified or not as we go into super tuesday but in terms of the bigger decision, i'm disappointed. we believe that it's up to colorado or any state to determine whether to disqualify oath-breaking insurrectionists from our ballots. ultimately, the united states supreme court disagreed. votes for donald trump will count and he is on our ballot. >> the court didn't address the sensitive issue whether trump has actually an insurrectionist. are you disappointed by that and what worries you most about this decision? >> i woul
paula reid at the supreme court. thank you very much joining us now, the colorado secretary of state, jenna griswold, madam secretary thanks so much for joining us. the high court says states don't have the power to remove federal candidates from the ballot. what's your reaction to this historic decision today? >> well, thank you for having me on first and foremost, i'm glad that they issued a decision colorado voters and american voters all across the country deserve to know whether...
0
0.0
Mar 4, 2024
03/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
victoria, what's your reaction to the supreme court's decision today? >> this is a win for former president trump, and this is going to be key so that narrative that trump has always had about him being the underdog, about him fighting the good fight against forces that want to keep him down. this is just the perfect narrative for him to take back to his base, right? this decision isn't necessarily going to change the minds of folks who might be on the fence, but it really is a further rallying solidifying gesture for his base. >> carlos, do you think this is going to have a huge impact on trump and his political advantage into this? >> jose, if we look at the results of the last presidential election, it was extremely close, so this isn't going to have a massive impact. we're not going to see massive shifts in polling, but because these elections are won on the margins, this matters, and this is, as we just heard going to help advance trump's victim hood narrative. he wants people to forget about the 6th of january. he wants people to believe that joe
victoria, what's your reaction to the supreme court's decision today? >> this is a win for former president trump, and this is going to be key so that narrative that trump has always had about him being the underdog, about him fighting the good fight against forces that want to keep him down. this is just the perfect narrative for him to take back to his base, right? this decision isn't necessarily going to change the minds of folks who might be on the fence, but it really is a further...
0
0.0
Mar 5, 2024
03/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
maguire back the supreme court >> you're welcome. america. >> well, they agree that there was going to be some chaos if every state gets to decide whether trump can be on the ballot they got to have consistency. that's going to come from congress. they said, not the states. otherwise, you've got this will not a hilou, but patchwork that was as far as they wanted the court to go. but i mean, tell a baby not to cry the rest of them all. but amy coney barrett, that is said, i see your patchwork and i raised you instructions for congress on what they ought to do next. now, we call that legislation, but forgive me for being a little bit cynical here. show me the money figures speaking. you see what happens in the supreme court ponds to congress, right section five of the voting rights act comes to mind as exhibit number a we're waiting for that new pre-clearance formula. right. >> are you >> well-conserved, justice? amy coney, barrett, ape donald trump's third nominee, agreeing that the court went too far, maybe one to stop also at the he
maguire back the supreme court >> you're welcome. america. >> well, they agree that there was going to be some chaos if every state gets to decide whether trump can be on the ballot they got to have consistency. that's going to come from congress. they said, not the states. otherwise, you've got this will not a hilou, but patchwork that was as far as they wanted the court to go. but i mean, tell a baby not to cry the rest of them all. but amy coney barrett, that is said, i see your...
0
0.0
Mar 30, 2024
03/24
by
CSPAN3
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
court and up to the united states supreme court. but darrow nevertheless, is going to put up a little bit of questioning of these jurors, who largely come from the countryside around dayton. almost all of them are men who are fundamentalists. and he's going to use up his peremptory challenges and then turn to ralston occasionally to try to dismiss some juries for cause. because of their really pronounced fundamentalist views. and ralston will reject those challenges under the theory as put forward by the attorney general in trying to argue against darrow. he says, look, if a man is subject to challenge by the defendant because he believes the bible conflicts with the theory of evolution, then for the converse reason, the state would have grounds to challenge for cause. anyone who believe the theory of evolution and the result would be that everyone on earth who could be brought here would be challenged. and darrow was like, yeah, i don't we haven't had too many of these jurors who are believe in the theory of evolution. and he says,
court and up to the united states supreme court. but darrow nevertheless, is going to put up a little bit of questioning of these jurors, who largely come from the countryside around dayton. almost all of them are men who are fundamentalists. and he's going to use up his peremptory challenges and then turn to ralston occasionally to try to dismiss some juries for cause. because of their really pronounced fundamentalist views. and ralston will reject those challenges under the theory as put...
0
0.0
Mar 4, 2024
03/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
that's not what the supreme court has done here. that's not what the supreme court typically does. this is a procedural legalistic decision. and essentially if i had to boil it down to one sentence, it would be it's up to congress, not the individual didn't want a big messy situation where all the states goes over there and that sort of thing. the word i circled in >> this decision is quote, patchwork. they said we don't want a patchwork or one states doing one thing, and another states don't another. >> but you know, donald trump better than most covered him for many many leaders, many years as a reporter covering him as a politician and as a figure who takes things and we'll turn them the way that he wants america and the world to see them. >> i will be shocked if donald trump doesn't, as soon as he can get out there and argue, not only that the supreme court is behind him, but he's probably going to argue, even though there's nothing in here that specifically says, as elie reportedly pointed out anything about what happened on january 6, it's just procedural about whether the st
that's not what the supreme court has done here. that's not what the supreme court typically does. this is a procedural legalistic decision. and essentially if i had to boil it down to one sentence, it would be it's up to congress, not the individual didn't want a big messy situation where all the states goes over there and that sort of thing. the word i circled in >> this decision is quote, patchwork. they said we don't want a patchwork or one states doing one thing, and another states...
0
0.0
Mar 4, 2024
03/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
court watchers expect the unanimity today will not expect the supreme court to be as unanimous and as together when they hear this issue on the presidential immunity issue, which is going to be heard the last week in april, neil. >> neil: thanks, david. david spunt on that. tom dupree here. tom, to you first on the significance of this and what it might telegraph for the immunity thing. are there apples around oranges there? >> there's a bit of apples and oranges. today's decision was unanimous as we heard. to my mind, that is hugely significant. it's hard to imagine any issue politically charged constitutional question in this day and age that could command universal, uniform ascent by all nine justices that speak with a single voice. the bottom line, colorado cannot kick former. trump off of the ballot. my best guest is this unanimity may be short listed. the immunity appeal which is coming up is likely to be much more polarizing. it wouldn't surprise me if we saw dissents in that case. today was a day where the court spoke unanimously. >> neil: i don't know, you get the sense that
court watchers expect the unanimity today will not expect the supreme court to be as unanimous and as together when they hear this issue on the presidential immunity issue, which is going to be heard the last week in april, neil. >> neil: thanks, david. david spunt on that. tom dupree here. tom, to you first on the significance of this and what it might telegraph for the immunity thing. are there apples around oranges there? >> there's a bit of apples and oranges. today's decision...
0
0.0
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
i want to start by thanking the supreme court for its unanimous decision. today, it was a very important decision, were very well crafted, and i think it will go a long way toward bringing our country together, which are countries dw, correspond, that vision. benjamin alvarez gruber has more on what the supreme court said this. this is indeed a major victory for donald trump when we just heard the appraising the supreme court is important to remember that he himself nominated 3 of the justices that have republican majority, 6 to 3. but as you said, all of them decided that it's not up to states to decide to one of which of the candidates it should be or shouldn't be on the ballot, they decided that is not up to states to decided but up to congress atc and to look into this section 3 of the 14th amendment, that has been in discussions, and it's a pretty important case. what they said here because it does not only close the dispute between the supreme court of colorado and the us to people, but also other states like in maine and also like, oh, you know, they
i want to start by thanking the supreme court for its unanimous decision. today, it was a very important decision, were very well crafted, and i think it will go a long way toward bringing our country together, which are countries dw, correspond, that vision. benjamin alvarez gruber has more on what the supreme court said this. this is indeed a major victory for donald trump when we just heard the appraising the supreme court is important to remember that he himself nominated 3 of the justices...
0
0.0
Mar 5, 2024
03/24
by
KQED
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
the colorado supreme court, can it stand? no, it cannot. where they agree on that is that it would be chaos, in the courts ruling, to have a state make a decision on the presidency itself. that is where the court agreed. in a 5-4 decision with the barrett joining the liberal wing all but in word, she didn't join them, but she shared the view of them that the court went too far, they could have just said the states can't wait in. but they affirmatively said, here is how congress can wade in and it is a way so limiting that it all but clears trump's hurdles and it might be a little bit of a signal for things to come with the immunity case. where does barrett stand on the question of this broad assertion of presidential immunity? are we seeing a signal that trump might have a tougher audience than he may think with one of his appointees, amy coney barrett? >> yes, really interesting. really good to get your thoughts. thank you. you are watching bbc news. let's take a quick look at some of the stories here today. charities and ca
the colorado supreme court, can it stand? no, it cannot. where they agree on that is that it would be chaos, in the courts ruling, to have a state make a decision on the presidency itself. that is where the court agreed. in a 5-4 decision with the barrett joining the liberal wing all but in word, she didn't join them, but she shared the view of them that the court went too far, they could have just said the states can't wait in. but they affirmatively said, here is how congress can wade in and...
0
0.0
Mar 4, 2024
03/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 1
unfortunately the supreme court decision here was not really defended in the u.s. supreme court. that led the court to get out over it skis today. for example. much of what the court said today that the 14 amendment is with states that can't police federal elections. i think that is wrong for the history. they had multiple, goals one was for restraining the states. another was bahrain insurrectionists from the office. as it happened in 1868 ohio. of course, the amendment itself says that two thirds of itself a rogue state unsettling like that, really donald trump couldn't get two thirds of the house in the senate to remove a disqualification as an insurrectionist. i think it is an unfortunate but expected decision today. >> what do you think about the message or warning for the concurring justices, neil? >> yeah, i think the supreme court works best when it doesn't -- it cares about its legitimacy, the most important constitutional law in the last hundred years by alexander basically said that the court preserve its legitimacy by not deciding things. that is traditionally already
unfortunately the supreme court decision here was not really defended in the u.s. supreme court. that led the court to get out over it skis today. for example. much of what the court said today that the 14 amendment is with states that can't police federal elections. i think that is wrong for the history. they had multiple, goals one was for restraining the states. another was bahrain insurrectionists from the office. as it happened in 1868 ohio. of course, the amendment itself says that two...
0
0.0
Mar 30, 2024
03/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
the state did take the case to the supreme court. in october our colleague laid the facts bear to the justices. they showed that this was a stark, racial gerrymander and shows that the justices should affirm the lower court. here we are 13 months after the panel of three judges found this to be unconstitutional and the legislature has not done anything. as a result the lower court says they have no court choice but to allow the election to go forward. >> that point that it is actually 13 months from a finding which is even more astounding. it is a perfect example of the justice delayed, justice denied, slowing the process down to essentially subvert accountability and reckoning which is precisely what i feel like is happening with the immunity case. >> i think you are right and i think you are insufficiently cynical. what we have not talked about is even when lower courts decide to say for the next election we will put a remedy in place and make sure we don't have and unconstitutional or illegal election the supreme court has a doctr
the state did take the case to the supreme court. in october our colleague laid the facts bear to the justices. they showed that this was a stark, racial gerrymander and shows that the justices should affirm the lower court. here we are 13 months after the panel of three judges found this to be unconstitutional and the legislature has not done anything. as a result the lower court says they have no court choice but to allow the election to go forward. >> that point that it is actually 13...
0
0.0
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
the supreme court showed that very well. i really do believe that'll be a unifying factor because while most states who are thrilled to have me, there were some that didn't and didn't want that for political reasons and didn't want that because of poll numbers because the poll numbers are very good. we're beating president biden in almost every poll, new york times came out yesterday with a very big poll for us. they didn't like that and you can't do that. you can't do what they tried to do. hopefully colorado as an example will unify and there's tremendous support. they've wrote their support up very strong in colorado and people in colorado thought it was a terrible thing that they did. while we're on the subject, and another thing that will be coming up very soon will be immunity for a president. not immunity for me but any president that if a president doesn't have full immunity, you really don't have a president because nobody that is serving in that office will have the courage to be the right decision and could be the
the supreme court showed that very well. i really do believe that'll be a unifying factor because while most states who are thrilled to have me, there were some that didn't and didn't want that for political reasons and didn't want that because of poll numbers because the poll numbers are very good. we're beating president biden in almost every poll, new york times came out yesterday with a very big poll for us. they didn't like that and you can't do that. you can't do what they tried to do....
0
0.0
Mar 5, 2024
03/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
supreme court yesterday 9-0. that ruling blocked nationwide efforts to keep him off the ballot and trump is looking out for a knockout blow maybe today, dana? >> dana: "the new york post" summoning it up best on the front page calling the race "a done deal." >> bill: clever. bret baier in studio has analysis. jackie on a rare interview from president biden. david on the next supreme court challenge. bill is with the haley camp and we're with the trump camp. that's where we begin on this super tuesday morning. good morning to you. >> good morning to you, bill and dana. this morning, the trump campaign is telling me that they hope to walk away with more than 1,000 delegates tonight. that includes the more than 200 that trump is walking into super tuesday with. and they're hoping to clinch this thing one week from today. trump, as you heard there, says nikki haley has absolutely no path ahead. here is how he's feeling ahead of the polls closing tonight. >> my focus is really at this point is on biden. we should win
supreme court yesterday 9-0. that ruling blocked nationwide efforts to keep him off the ballot and trump is looking out for a knockout blow maybe today, dana? >> dana: "the new york post" summoning it up best on the front page calling the race "a done deal." >> bill: clever. bret baier in studio has analysis. jackie on a rare interview from president biden. david on the next supreme court challenge. bill is with the haley camp and we're with the trump camp....
0
0.0
Mar 4, 2024
03/24
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
either way let's get to the supreme court. the supreme court, i kind of trust them. i have both wayse. i do not appreciate a lot of the voices. i will and up being -- end up being, like a lot of the callers said, i list the arguments and judge sotomayor and judge brown sound like they will vote for every time i watch msnbc and cnn -- i watch all stations -- insurrection, insurrection. donald trump was never charged people currently sitting in jail that stormed the capital and did do things to charge them with insurrection. he should not be removed from the ballot because it sets a precedent for red states to do the same thing, to remove the runner it is a slippery slope. it really is. as far as the thing in georgia i think the evidence is going to prove, has pron, that those two, fani willis and mr. wade lied under oath. host: do you thinkt= residential immunity is a slippery slope? caller: yes, i do. not 100% immunity. that i agree with you on that aspect, but like the other callers, joe biden took documents out. and one callers while he was vice president, which is
either way let's get to the supreme court. the supreme court, i kind of trust them. i have both wayse. i do not appreciate a lot of the voices. i will and up being -- end up being, like a lot of the callers said, i list the arguments and judge sotomayor and judge brown sound like they will vote for every time i watch msnbc and cnn -- i watch all stations -- insurrection, insurrection. donald trump was never charged people currently sitting in jail that stormed the capital and did do things to...
0
0.0
Mar 4, 2024
03/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
supreme court saw that very well. and i really do believe that will be a unified factor because while most states were thrilled to have me, there were some that didn't and they didn't want that for political reasons. they didn't want that because of poll numbers. because the poll numbers are very good. we're beating president biden in almost every poll. "new york times" came out yesterday with a very big poll for us. so they, they didn't like that and you can't do that, you can't do what they tried to do. hopefully colorado as an example will unify. i know there's tremendous important. it brought our support up in colorado. the people in colorado thought that was a terrible thing they did. while we're on the subject and another thing that will be coming up very soon will be immunity for a president. not for me, but for any president. if a president doesn't have full immunity, you really don't have a president because nobody that is serving in an office will have the courage to make in many cases, what would be the rig
supreme court saw that very well. and i really do believe that will be a unified factor because while most states were thrilled to have me, there were some that didn't and they didn't want that for political reasons. they didn't want that because of poll numbers. because the poll numbers are very good. we're beating president biden in almost every poll. "new york times" came out yesterday with a very big poll for us. so they, they didn't like that and you can't do that, you can't do...
0
0.0
Mar 4, 2024
03/24
by
ESPRESO
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
the decision of the supreme court of the state of colorado, but the supreme court of the state of colorado more than a month ago, almost two months ago, ruled that the candidacy of donald trump cannot be entered on the ballot for the primaries and such way amendments to the us constitution, that's what he says, he forbids this section any formerly sworn senators, members of the house of representatives, and other public officers, to hold public offices, if they have taken part in rebellion or sedition against. of the united states of america, that is, on the one hand, you and vasylya said this before the broadcast, exactly, the supreme court of the united states of america did not say that, yes, trump is innocent, and that is why we let him in, allow him to participate in the elections, he simply no, he simply said that the supreme court of the state of colorado had no jurisdiction, simply to hear these matters, and these matters belong entirely to the jurisdiction of the supreme court of the united states of america, that is, the central main court, but in any case, this is also ... bad,
the decision of the supreme court of the state of colorado, but the supreme court of the state of colorado more than a month ago, almost two months ago, ruled that the candidacy of donald trump cannot be entered on the ballot for the primaries and such way amendments to the us constitution, that's what he says, he forbids this section any formerly sworn senators, members of the house of representatives, and other public officers, to hold public offices, if they have taken part in rebellion or...
0
0.0
Mar 4, 2024
03/24
by
ESPRESO
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
how do supreme courts argue this? yes, they say that the states cannot disqualify candidates from the presidential election, because it is a federal office, not a state-level office. well, again , they say that... this is not an issue that is decided by individual states. also judges warned natalya that if donald trump , or ultimately any candidate, were disqualified from participating in certain states, in some states, and left on the ballot in other states, it could cause chaos and ultimately disrupt or jeopardize the electoral process as a whole the country donald trump himself reacted to the decision of the supreme court today, calling it a great victory for america. natalya. ostapa, how will this decision affect the course of the presidential campaign and how this and other cases against donald trump affect american voters? yes, viewers write to natalya that this decision of the supreme court has become perhaps the most important in relation to the presidential elections since 2000. then, let me remind you, the s
how do supreme courts argue this? yes, they say that the states cannot disqualify candidates from the presidential election, because it is a federal office, not a state-level office. well, again , they say that... this is not an issue that is decided by individual states. also judges warned natalya that if donald trump , or ultimately any candidate, were disqualified from participating in certain states, in some states, and left on the ballot in other states, it could cause chaos and ultimately...
0
0.0
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
i want to start by thanking the supreme court for its unanimous decision. today, it was a very important decision, were very well crafted, and i think it will go a long way toward bringing our country together, which are countries. so i thought responded to in washington, janelle do malone. i told him all the supreme court has unanimously rule to allow trump to stay on the ballot for the colorado primary. now of course, this has wide ranging implications. not just for colorado, but this will apply nationwide. we know that there were similar pushes to keep trump off the ballot in the likes of maine and illinois. but basically what this ruling does is that it ends challenges to trumps candidacy. related to section 3 of the 14th amendment. so that's the part of the constitution that bars interaction is from holding office. so the message behind the court's ruling is that so it should not be up to individual states to in for section 3. and, but that could lead to chaos if different states come to different conclusions. rather, they think that it should be up to
i want to start by thanking the supreme court for its unanimous decision. today, it was a very important decision, were very well crafted, and i think it will go a long way toward bringing our country together, which are countries. so i thought responded to in washington, janelle do malone. i told him all the supreme court has unanimously rule to allow trump to stay on the ballot for the colorado primary. now of course, this has wide ranging implications. not just for colorado, but this will...
0
0.0
Mar 1, 2024
03/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
recount, the supreme court stepped in. they granted the bush campaign an emergency stay to stop florida from counting the votes. do not count anymore votes. the reason that bush wanted that was that the bush campaign was worried that if the recount continued, allegra would pull ahead. and then, one day after granting search in one of the most expedited cases of all- time, but conservative court took oral arguments and began deliberating quickly. >> it doesn't get any more tense than this. the justices working for a second night on the historic decision. all this waiting for a decision on a case that was after all argued on you yesterday. the justices seem determined to rule on this case quickly, well aware of the committee deadlines for choosing presidential electors. >> just four days after granting -- bias ingle vote, the high could permanently stop the recount and gifted george w g bush presidential victory. so when it comes to making sure that presidential candidate for president gets into office the supreme court can
recount, the supreme court stepped in. they granted the bush campaign an emergency stay to stop florida from counting the votes. do not count anymore votes. the reason that bush wanted that was that the bush campaign was worried that if the recount continued, allegra would pull ahead. and then, one day after granting search in one of the most expedited cases of all- time, but conservative court took oral arguments and began deliberating quickly. >> it doesn't get any more tense than this....
0
0.0
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
it is not the supreme court's case, i cannot -- the supreme court's fault. i cannot emphasize this enough that the justice department waited until year four of the biden administration in the middle of election season to bring these cases, and the supreme court has good reason to consider the matters in both of them. elizabeth: you know, so the other -- the federal case, the classify ifed document case in florida, that could be drayed. it was supposed to tart may 20th, but you're right, that could be clay ared -- delayed too. the weakest case, the new york hush money payment case, is supposedly going to start in just a few weeks, on march 25th. but as you noted, there are problems with this too. manhattan d.a. bragg, he's boot strap ising a books and recorded case into a federal -- it's actually a misdemeanor, boot strapping a misdemeanor into a federal felony case claiming hush money pa paid to stormy daniels was meant to interis fear and influence the -- interfere is and influence the 2016 election. >> alvin bragg campaigned about going after donald trump.
it is not the supreme court's case, i cannot -- the supreme court's fault. i cannot emphasize this enough that the justice department waited until year four of the biden administration in the middle of election season to bring these cases, and the supreme court has good reason to consider the matters in both of them. elizabeth: you know, so the other -- the federal case, the classify ifed document case in florida, that could be drayed. it was supposed to tart may 20th, but you're right, that...
0
0.0
Mar 4, 2024
03/24
by
BBCNEWS
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
court was trespassing on the province _ supreme court was trespassing on the province of— supreme court was trespassing on the province of the — supreme court was trespassing on the province of the executive. _ supreme court was trespassing on the province of the executive. by- supreme court was trespassing on the province of the executive.— province of the executive. by the executive committee _ province of the executive. by the executive committee means - province of the executive. by the executive committee means the | executive committee means the government, but his colleague, lord ken clarke, said it was absurd for ministers to pass a law saying rwanda was safe when a court has said it isn't. rwanda was safe when a court has said it isn't-— said it isn't. the supreme court 'udues, said it isn't. the supreme court judges. five _ said it isn't. the supreme court judges. five of _ said it isn't. the supreme court judges, five of them, _ said it isn't. the supreme court - judges, five of them, unanimously, considered — judges, five of them, unanimously, considered that and cam
court was trespassing on the province _ supreme court was trespassing on the province of— supreme court was trespassing on the province of the — supreme court was trespassing on the province of the executive. _ supreme court was trespassing on the province of the executive. by- supreme court was trespassing on the province of the executive.— province of the executive. by the executive committee _ province of the executive. by the executive committee means - province of the executive. by...
0
0.0
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
so why would the supreme court one to review that? right, constitutional scholars, legal scholars almost across the board are saying that of course, the president does not have absolute immunity. a crime is that he or eventually she may commit. that would turn a president into a dictator or a king, which of course is the exact opposite of what the united states was founded on and try to get away from 250 some odd years ago. the question of the spring quarters dealing with as to what extent is the president or is a president potentially immune and that has far reaching effects nationally, not just for donald trump and not just for this moment, but also going ahead. so it's plausible to think that the supreme court wants to wait on this as the highest court in the land to set a standard for exactly what is and is not a president liable for awhile. and office trump is on track to clinch the republican party is not a nation as presidential cat candidate, but i mean, you know, with all of this going on, he could be disqualified. blame. wha
so why would the supreme court one to review that? right, constitutional scholars, legal scholars almost across the board are saying that of course, the president does not have absolute immunity. a crime is that he or eventually she may commit. that would turn a president into a dictator or a king, which of course is the exact opposite of what the united states was founded on and try to get away from 250 some odd years ago. the question of the spring quarters dealing with as to what extent is...
0
0.0
Mar 4, 2024
03/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
the supreme court siding with donald trump. inside the unanimous decision and why it avoided one big question. did the former president engage in an insurrection. >>> plus, how trump is reacting to the historic decision. his new comments outside mar-a-lago as he pushes ahead to a big super tuesday. >>> also breaking, trump's money man in handcuffs, and pleading guilty, what he's accused of lying about under oath. >>> and the man behind one of the biggest pentagon leaks in years back in court. the sentence for jack teixeira has part of a plea deal with prosecutors. our nbc news reporters are following all of the latest developments. we begin with nbc's ryan reilly who is covering this unanimous ruling from the supreme court. ryan, what stands out in this decision by the court? >> i think really that the court wanted to come to a united decision on this that left no doubt here in terms of 9-0 for the main part of this ruling here. essentially what it means is that on the day of what was supposed to be the first trial for donald t
the supreme court siding with donald trump. inside the unanimous decision and why it avoided one big question. did the former president engage in an insurrection. >>> plus, how trump is reacting to the historic decision. his new comments outside mar-a-lago as he pushes ahead to a big super tuesday. >>> also breaking, trump's money man in handcuffs, and pleading guilty, what he's accused of lying about under oath. >>> and the man behind one of the biggest pentagon...
0
0.0
Mar 4, 2024
03/24
by
BBCNEWS
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
down this ruling by the colorado supreme court, and it comesjust ruling by the colorado supreme court, and it comes just a ruling by the colorado supreme court, and it comesjust a day before voters go out to vote in the primary election. this before voters go out to vote in the primary election-— before voters go out to vote in the primary election. this will be seen, as we were — primary election. this will be seen, as we were saying, _ primary election. this will be seen, as we were saying, personally, - primary election. this will be seen, as we were saying, personally, mrl as we were saying, personally, mr trump is likely to use this to boost and bolster his campaign. can you remind us where we are when it comes to how close he is to becoming the republicans' candidate of choice this year? he republicans' candidate of choice this ear? , , this year? he will definitely use this year? he will definitely use this to boost _ this year? he will definitely use this to boost his _ this year? he will definitely use this to boost his campaign. - this year? he will definitely use this t
down this ruling by the colorado supreme court, and it comesjust ruling by the colorado supreme court, and it comes just a ruling by the colorado supreme court, and it comesjust a day before voters go out to vote in the primary election. this before voters go out to vote in the primary election-— before voters go out to vote in the primary election. this will be seen, as we were — primary election. this will be seen, as we were saying, _ primary election. this will be seen, as we were...
0
0.0
Mar 2, 2024
03/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
so, that issue in front of the supreme court now in this immunity case is the question that supreme court said it was taking's weather and if so, to what extent, a former president is entitled to immunity from criminal prosecutions for actions taken within the scope of his official acts. both lower courts, judge chutkan in the district court in the d.c. circuit, unanimously, three judges, rejected that mr. trump as a former president, had any immunity from criminal prosecution, even for official acts. remember, this is when we had a question judge panel asked. got the president ordered s.e.a.l. team six to execute a political opponent? but that be an official act? the answer from mr. trump's attorney was basically, yes. so, those courts said you just don't have, you just don't have immunity from criminal prosecution, even for things within the scope of your official acts. the supreme court could agree with that, and if so, sent back down to start the trial. make a disagree with that and say there could be immunity for certain actions taken within the scope of official acts, but right, now
so, that issue in front of the supreme court now in this immunity case is the question that supreme court said it was taking's weather and if so, to what extent, a former president is entitled to immunity from criminal prosecutions for actions taken within the scope of his official acts. both lower courts, judge chutkan in the district court in the d.c. circuit, unanimously, three judges, rejected that mr. trump as a former president, had any immunity from criminal prosecution, even for...
0
0.0
Mar 4, 2024
03/24
by
BBCNEWS
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
the supreme court decided to back _ thousand votes. the supreme court decided to back colorado, _ thousand votes. the supreme court decided to back colorado, many - thousand votes. the supreme court l decided to back colorado, many many people in colorado who could legitimately argue that they had been disenfranchised if donald trump was disqualified, but this supreme court has unanimously decided that donald trump will stay on the ballot because in terms of the amendment that you mentioned there and we heard this in the oral arguments last month, the question of a bella dvd of it. of that amendment to restrict states after the civil war to restrict confederate states and why would you give one state the power to knock someone off the ballot like that, it would have set a very extraordinary precedent. so this is a unanimous decision and as you mentioned donald trump is described as a big win for america and is expected to comment on the ruling some point this morning. find ruling some point this morning. and how close is — ruling so
the supreme court decided to back _ thousand votes. the supreme court decided to back colorado, _ thousand votes. the supreme court decided to back colorado, many - thousand votes. the supreme court l decided to back colorado, many many people in colorado who could legitimately argue that they had been disenfranchised if donald trump was disqualified, but this supreme court has unanimously decided that donald trump will stay on the ballot because in terms of the amendment that you mentioned...
0
0.0
Mar 4, 2024
03/24
by
BBCNEWS
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
for more, we can go straight to the supreme court, where we can join can go straight to the supreme court, where we canjoin our can go straight to the supreme court, where we can join our north america conned respondent. let's set this in context. —— corresponded. to be the candidate, it involves winning a series of primaries, many elections, across the united states. —— mini elections. this ruling now means he can be in that one in colorado. means he can be in that one in comrade-— means he can be in that one in colorado. ., . ., , ., ., , colorado. correct, and his name was alread on colorado. correct, and his name was already on the _ colorado. correct, and his name was already on the ballot _ colorado. correct, and his name was already on the ballot in _ colorado. correct, and his name was already on the ballot in colorado. . already on the ballot in colorado. it's worth pointing out that 4 million people received their ballots last month in colorado in order to vote in early mail ballots. the secretary of state for colorado said over the weekend they have already received 8
for more, we can go straight to the supreme court, where we can join can go straight to the supreme court, where we canjoin our can go straight to the supreme court, where we can join our north america conned respondent. let's set this in context. —— corresponded. to be the candidate, it involves winning a series of primaries, many elections, across the united states. —— mini elections. this ruling now means he can be in that one in colorado. means he can be in that one in comrade-—...
0
0.0
Mar 5, 2024
03/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 1
the supreme court ignored that argument and left standing the finding by the colorado supreme court that donald trump did indeed engage in insurrection. the supreme court's opinion simply said that the individual states are not allowed to enforce the provisions of section three of the 14th amendment against candidates for federal office. the opinion said that the state of colorado could enforce section three of the 14th amendment against candidates seeking state and local offices in colorado. the five republican men on the supreme court, two of whom were appointed by donald trump, extended their majority opinion far beyond what the nine justices were willing to agree on in the essential ruling by indicating that the federal enforcement of the 14th amendment would require the congress to pass implementing legislation. the three justices of the supreme court appointed by president obama and president biden wrote a separate opinion of only six pages where they referred to donald trump as an oath breaking insurrectionist four times and said, quote, legislation of any kind, however are, is no
the supreme court ignored that argument and left standing the finding by the colorado supreme court that donald trump did indeed engage in insurrection. the supreme court's opinion simply said that the individual states are not allowed to enforce the provisions of section three of the 14th amendment against candidates for federal office. the opinion said that the state of colorado could enforce section three of the 14th amendment against candidates seeking state and local offices in colorado....