michigan supreme court has rejected appeal base coming just days after colorado supreme court made the bar the president from the ballot. michigan supreme court argues there is no legal ground and the colorado ruling does not change that. significantly colorado election law differ from michigan laws in material way directly relevant to why the appellates are not entitled to the presidential primary election in michigan. we will go now to chad pergram who will explain all this in washington. chad, to you. >> the michigan supreme court upheld decision by lower court, the court held does not give election official leeway to judge eligibility of candidates for the ballot. president trump called it a gambut to rig the election. michigan is more important than colorado in 2024. it is a swing state. michigan could determine the presidential election. michigan was close in 2020, president biden beat president trump by 85,000 votes, but many in the muslim community are upset with president biden. it was imposed on confederates after the civil war. >> molly: great point, chad pergram, your insig

did mention the michigan case. supreme court they're made a decision to keep donald trump on the states republican primary ballot. what exactly did the court take into account and how to differ from that colorado case? >> that michigan decision wasn't as monumental as the supreme court case. because in colorado, the justices there really weighed in on that meat off the issue. the 14th amendment, what it means, why it excludes trump from the ballot in the rough. instead, what the michigan supreme court did today, they wrote a really short order analysts faced by what the lower courts had done in dismissing the case. they concluded this was really just a political question about whether the 14th amendment mp, it should be distorted by political bodies, by congress. and as i mentioned before, that's a lot of what legal scholars are saying. as what the u.s. supreme court actually might. do they might not roll on the ultimate issue here. they might dismiss this saying it isn't the job for the courts to decide if trump violated this 1

was likely to take the colorado case even before the michigan supreme court did what it did today. i think the michigan decision underscores that this colorado decision is an outlier. you'll recall that many state supreme courts across the country had previously rejected this theory up until the colorado rule. the michigan court has followed in the footsteps of those pre colorado courts. so i don't think it has a huge impact on the supreme court's willingness and likelihood to take the case. i think the supreme court is likely to grant trump's appeal, to decide this case and i think they're very likely to overrule the colorado supreme court. >> we'll wait to see what they decide. kristen holmes, we're watching all of this. trump's team is obviously touting what happened in michigan as a victory. do they need these efforts to boot trump from the ballots not just in michigan and colorado and maine as helpful to them or what are they saying privately about this? >> privately, this is one of the legal issues they're the least worried about. as tom mentioned, we h

michigan supreme court saying they're not getting involved. not up to them who is on the primary ballot in michigan whenever that primary election comes around. there were people that had gone to the courts in michigan to challenge donald trump's ability to appear on that primary ballot, and the courts throughout michigan the lower courts, the middle courts and the supreme court now in michigan say it's now up for us to decide. one of the justices in michigan did wright that this state, michigan and their state laws and how they govern their primary election is very different from how colorado governs their election. the colorado supreme court just last week is the state and is the court that decided trump could not appear on their primary ballot because of the 14th amendment of the constitution, the insurrectionist ban, saying he should qualify as an insurrectionist and thus should not be able to qualify as a presidential candidate including in the primaries there. in michigan, what the court wrote today is we are not persuaded that the quest

there was a question whether other supreme courts would join colorado supreme court. michiganmed by not taking up the appeal, that he in fact will remain on the primary ballots, though one of the justices suggested in his dissent they could bring it up for the general election. we're waiting to see if the supreme court will hear the appeal out of the colorado. we expect the trump team to actually file the appeal, but for donald trump's take, he says, quote, the michigan supreme court has denied the desperate attempt to take the leading candidates, me, off the ballot in the great state of michigan. if the supreme court were to affirm colorado's decision, it would throw this republican race into the air, and my boss, just on which the camera here, she's going to be the one helping to coordinate or team here, also the political and the legal coverage. we're awaiting the appeals all at the same time. any one of these days is when we have a number of hearings. this will be a complicated january and february for donald trump and frankly our coverage. >> a shoutout to emily there. bu

donald trump with a win in michigan where the state supreme court rejected a bid to remove him from themary ballot. trump quick to hail that on social media today. the fight is really just beginning. michigan is the fourth state to reject efforts to keep trump off the primary ballot. similar efforts continue in a number of other states. a ruling in maine is expected any day now. trump is actually now demanding that maine's democratic secretary of state, who would decide that ballot issue, recuse herself because of past comments she made about january 6th. so far, as you see on the map, one state, colorado, has ruled to remove trump's name from the ballot. the ball is back in donald trump's court now in his legal battles with special counsel jack smith. smith's team arguing in a new filing that trump should not be allowed to push political talking points during his election subversion trial saying in part, the court should not permit the defendant to turn the courtroom into a forum in which he propagates irrelevant disinformation and should reject his attempt to inject politics into this

but does this michigan decision, if the supreme court does take this up, if the trump team does appealt happened in colorado, how does what happened in michigan today factor into the supreme court in the way they look at this? >> well, i think trump's team will need to broaden what the michigan issue is, because on its face, it's not really in contrast to colorado. because colorado reached the merits of it. the supreme court will look at these merits, these constitutional questions, whether the president can be disqualified from this kind of process, was he an insurrectionist, is he an officer of the united states? michigan has taken this very narrow view that says we can't decide this because it's only a party primary. if you put up a 12-year-old kid for the primary, would they say hands off, we have to wait until the general election? so like norm was saying, all the states have different laws, subject to individual state laws. it's an interesting challenge for the supreme court. do they want to try to unify on these sorts of very specific questions, and they should. . the states hav

supreme court made the decision to keep trump on the state's republican primary ballot. what exactly did the court take into account, and how did it differ from the colorado case? >> the michigan decision, it really wasn't as monumental as the colorado supreme court case because in colorado the justices there really weighed in on the meat of the issue. you know, the 14th amendment, what it means, why it excludes trump from the ballot, in their view. instead, what the michigan supreme court did today, they wrote a really short order and they said they stood by what the lower courts had done in dismissing the case. they concluded that this was really just a political question about whether the 14th amendment applies to trump. it should be decided by political bodies, by congress. and, you know, as i mentioned before, that's a lot of of what legal scholars are saying, what the u.s. supreme court might do. they might not rule on the ultimate issue here. they might just dismiss this, saying it isn't the job for the courts to decide if trump violated this 14th amendment. instead it's a political decision. we're seeing all these courts weigh in. so, the u.s. supreme court will likely

has more on the story and the supreme court in colorado ruled to bar donald trump from their ballot in that state. give us a sense of what the supreme court said in the michiganhi, sara. two very different outcomes between colorado and michigan. they held a trial and there were witnesses, evidence and cross-examination. a very different situation in michigan. when this case was filed there was one hearing and then it was dismissed on procedural grounds and that was the decision today from the michigan supreme court to uphold that decision to dismiss this case for procedural reasons. they did not reach the critical questions about january 6th and whether donald trump engaged in the insurrection and is disqualified from office. the michigan supreme court, their decisions was a few sentences long and it was not signed and one of the justices did write about her rationale and i'll read it to you here. she said, quote, i would affirm the court of appeals ruling on this issue which still allows the appellants to renew their legal efforts as to the michigan general election later in 2024 should trump become the republican nominee for president. that's a critical dis

the michigan supreme court has decided trump stays on the ballot, declining to take up a challenge byal-leaning group seeking to declare trump ineligible from running in the 2024 republican primary based on his attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 election. >> if there's uncertainty about whether someone should have access to the ballot, you decide in favor of giving the voters the choice, and allow that person on the ballot. >> reporter: trump lauded the decision, writing on social media the michigan supreme court "strongly and rightfully" turned aside what he called "this pathetic gambit." there are similar challenges to trump's eligibility in more than a dozen other states, including oregon and in maine, where the decision is up to the secretary of state. today, trump's lawyers said maine secretary of state shenna bellows, a democrat, "has exhibited a personal bias," and asked her to recuse herself. so far, only the colorado supreme court has disqualified trump, and he's expected to appeal to the u.s. supreme court. all of the challenges cite january 6th, and are based on s

supreme court's decision has been paused pending an appeal. with these two decisions in colorado and now most recently in michigan, the expected appeals to the u.s. supreme court because more critical especially with the nation's 2024 primaries around the corner. so what say you as far as the timeliness of all this? does the supreme court come out with a decision sooner than later? will we get that word sometime this week? a decision needs to be made especially with the primaries. >> yeah, you hit an important issue. when you have two supreme courts that are on opposite positions on a question of law, then the supreme court is obligated to step in and to solve that distinction. but what's different here is that the supreme court could simply not decide whether to take the case or not. if they do that, they hold off and wait to see what happens on this legal landscape, president trump will still be on the ballot in colorado. the supreme court was very wishy-washy when it came to what they were actually doing. they indicated while the supreme court decides, he remains on the ballot. >> julie: interesting. a delay is what the trump campaign wants a

michigan supreme court handed former president trump legal victory that trumps name could in fact remainballot for the upcoming primary. scott macfarlane reports that the decision comes in a week before colorado supreme court took a different approach. >> reporter: nearly three yesterday after january 6, donald trump is tangled in a growing number of legal battles over his role in what happened that day. the michigan supreme court today swatted away a request to prevent trump from it. the states of .14 primary ballot for allegedly violating 14th and never bandit for supporting insurrection. court order says we are not persuaded the questions presented should be reviewed by this court. the decision is the opposite one it reached by colorado supreme court last week, which rolled up by f 4-3 margin, to strip trumps a primary ballot. fbi told her "cbs news" that the threads of the color of those dresses ports about because of the root arrest and execution after days of the ruling. more than a dozen states were being this type of challenges, the stage could be said for a review a decision by

ballot in colorado, there are questions how other potential supreme courts and states around the country would rule. we have a ruling here from michigan appeal, but we should note that instead they -- all but punt here, in fact, the supreme court is not actually taking up the appeal, instead of affirming the decision of the lower court here, there was one dissenting judge who stated in a dissent, a five-page filing that he believed that the court should have considered this, yet sort of threw out his own writings here, essentially backed the decision of the supreme court, and the lower court's decision. writing that there's a difference between colorado state law and michigan state law. >> right. >> so in colorado he writes that there's a distinction under their law that one must attest to being a qualified candidate, versus in the state of michigan, somebody must sign an affidavit of identity, and particularly under michigan law, that does not apply to candidates for president. in that justice who wrote this and said that the supreme court should have taken this up under consideration, did write that, quote, i would affirm the court

supreme court takes it up, they could go into what exactly the 14th amendment means with this insurrection ban or the supreme court could ignore the issue just like michigan and say this is not for the courts to decide, this is a political issue. >> really short statement from the michigan supreme court, how do these statements compared to other efforts? >> we have seen a flurry of cases where challengers have tried to take trump off the ballot in several states, a lot of these cases have been dismissed immediately because the challengers have not been the right people to bring these cases, we see a number, colorado the most momentous, they are really trump should be taken off the ballot, it's rejected in several states, arizona, michigan and new hampshire, there's also a case pending in oregon, we know that means a terry of stay is expected to issue this on whether trump should be taken off the ballot, that's an interesting case because it goes before the secretary of state, no matter what the secretary of state decides, it is likely it will get appealed, this is ongoing issues in several states. >> this michigan decision is not hard to see it as a victo

secretary blinken arrived for the meetings with mexico's president. >>> new word from the state supreme court in michigan. donald trump's name will remain on the state's 2024 primary ballot. the supreme court there rejecting an effort to get him taken off the ballot. >>> plus, power, revenge, dictatorship. three words front and center on a word cloud voters used to describe donald trump's political goals in a potential second term. why did donald trump himself repost it? we'll discuss when we come back. >>> so after a legal battle, donald trump's name will be on michigan's primary ballot next year. that's what the state supreme court ruled today effectively refusing to hear a case decided in a lower court that rejected efforts to ban the former president from the upcoming election. >> unlike last week's colorado ruling that removed trump from that state's primary ballot, michigan's high court sidestepped the argument surrounding the 14th amendment's insurrection ban. caitlin is here to explain. i think people look at this and say wait, this is all the same question and there are different rulings dependi

court of michigan again? it is very likely it would end up in the court of michigan again and ultimately at the us supreme courtlve a novel interpretation of the constitution, it is the us supreme court's job to make that call and that determination. there are a number of variables and facts that have yet to play out and that could very well play out over the next eight—nine months. that's why in some cases some states are looking at this, like minnesota, as a premature determination in the primary process and have not ruled out a determination further on down the line if donald trump becomes the general election nominee. you said your role as a chief election official in michigan is like being a referee, but i wonder, it must also be putting you and other secretaries of state in a difficult position to have this novel question before the courts? indeed it has — notjust to us but to voters and to the political parties. everyone in this case needs clarity. i strongly believe the institutions to provide that clarity are ourjudicial institutions and that is how the process is ultimately playing out. but at the sam

michigan supreme court has just rejected an attempt to remove former president trump from the michigan ballot in 2024. this decision, obviously, is in contrast to colorado's high court last week ruling that trump is ineligible to appear on the ballot. katelyn polantz with more. so many states considering this now. this is a crucial decision in a crucial sta state in this election. tell us more. >> very crucial state. one of the states that donald trump wanted to contest after the 2020 election. here in michigan the michigan supreme court is saying this isn't something that we want to even look at. the lower courts sided with donald trump previously, and the justices today in michigan this morning say we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this court. that is what their opinion held. that is essentially them saying we are not touching it. what happened so far stands, and, thus, trump is going to remain on the ballot in the state of michigan. this follows a couple other major lawsuits he has been successful in keeping his name on the ballot wherever there

court, end quote. and the ruling comes in michigan just a brief period after the colorado supreme court made the oppositedecision. that court barred trump from colorado's primary ballot for engaging in insurrection by inciting the january 6th attack. since then, the fbi has begun existing denver police and investigating violent threats to the justices who made that ruling. right, now trump faces losses to keep him off the ballot in at least a dozen states beyond colorado and michigan. let's just say he's got his hands full. michigan's highest court voted the voters suing their could renew their case for the general election if donald trump becomes the republican nominee. and for now, the colorado ruling blocking him from the state's ballot is on hold until january 4th. trump's campaign is expected to appeal the ruling to the united states supreme court. back with me is my panel. attorney glenn kirschner, former congressman david jolly, and my friend superlawyer barbara mcquade. barbara, i want to talk to you. can you -- even though i said it in the lead, up some people might be confused. what is the diff

supreme court took a different approach. >> reporter: nearly three years today after january 6, donald trump is tangled in a growing number of illegal battles over his role in what happened that day. the michiganrt today swatted away a request to prevent trump from appearing in the states 2024 primary ballot for allegedly violating 14th amendment ban on supporting insurrection. the court order says, we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this court. the decision is opposite, one reached by colorado supreme court last week, which ruled by four to three margin, to strip trump from that state's primary ballot. the fbi told cbs news that it is investigating threats on other colorado justices and it reports of their arrest or execution, in the days after the ruling. with more than a dozen states now reviewing these type of challenges, the stage can be set for a review and decision by the u.s. supreme court early next year. >> right now, we have different results from different states. i think the supreme court is going to be concerned about that. >> reporter: trump said today, any attempt to keep him off the primary ballot is a pathetic gambit to rig the election, a

is this the correct decision from a legal standpoint from the michigan supreme court, according to michigan's >> kerri: i certainly think so. the fact that judges could single handedly unilaterally remove the opportunity for an entire block of voters, here republicans who want to vote for trump, remove that from them, strikes me as remarkably, it is unprecedented but not the way we do political or justice in this country and so they did make the right call and interesting to see if the supreme court getting involved now that we have dueling decisions from colorado and michigan. >> jonathan: as you look across the country, kerri, the states with active litigation are trying to prevent former president donald trump from getting on the ballot in 2024. it's pretty remarkable. he's that's got one victory today in michigan. he's going to need a lot more or one big one at the u.s. supreme court. >> kerri: yeah, and again, the supreme court as we all know has full discretion as to what they take up. i do think that these opposite decisions probably make it a bit more appealing, a bit more right for t

the michigan supreme court today swatted away a request to prevent trump from appearing on the state'sy ballot for allegedly violating the 14th amendment's ban on supporting insurrection. the court order said, "we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this court." the decision is the opposite of one reached by one colorado supreme court last week which ruled bay 4-3 margin to strip trump from that state's primary ballot. the fbi tells cbs news it's investigating threats against the colorado justices amidst reports of calls for their arrests or execution in the days after the ruling. with more than a dozen states now reviewing these types of challenges, the stage could be set for a review and decision by the u.s. supreme court early next year. >> right now, we have different results from different states. i think the supreme court is going to be concerned about that. >> reporter: trump today said any attempt to keep him off the primary ballot is a pathetic gambit to rig the election, and that colorado is the only state to have fallen prey to the scheme. >>

court judge did here. that's why we had that position in michigan, i would not be surprised if the united states supreme court does something similar. >> how much of this could be a preview of what we see from the supreme court? >> in colorado, you mentioned there was a decision by the supreme court. all seven of those justices were appointed by democrats, here in the united states supreme court, you have nine justices and i think rather famously not only six of them appointed, but three of them are appointed by donald trump himself. i would be surprised if the supreme court ultimately affirms the colorado decision not based on merits necessarily but just because i suspect those judges may look at this as a political issue we try to find an offramp or a way out from making a decision which is what the judge in michigan donato while -- did as well. >> they could remove trump from the general election ballot, they did not hear a case for the gop primary ballot. what is the difference in that lawsuit? >> it will be interesting to see whether or not there is a different result, it depends on what judges it is in

also tonight, michigan supreme court decides against removing trump from the 2024 ballot, unlike colorado's highest court and now extra security is needed for those justices. plus, the republicans all out assault on voting rights, which includes plans to ask the u.s. supreme court to preserve their undemocratically gerrymandered maps in wisconsin. good evening. i'm charles coleman, in four joy reid, and we have got a lot to talk about. we begin tonight with a new year faster protesting, many looking head to 2024 and wondering what else could be in store. that certainly appears to be the case for former president donald trump who has been the holidays not spreading pace and joy but rather lashing out at a flood of social media post focused on his perilous legal year ahead. and perhaps he is understanding that he might not be able to escape the consequences for his alleged criminal activities. while lashing out on social media is not something new for trump, this holiday temper tantrum involved a christmas day greeting for his perceived enemies that included, a statement may they rot in hell.

i will move on to the michigan supreme court. y yesterday when it rejected a move to kick former president trump off of the 2024 primary ballot and this as you know comes one week after the colorado supreme court decided to disqualify trump from their state's primary ballot. the colorado republican primary, that party has officially appealed that decision to the u.s. supreme court. we wait for the u.s. supreme court to weigh in. in the meantime former president trump has praised michigan's ruling and writes the state supreme court has strongly and rightfully denied the desperate democrat attempt to take the leading candidate in the 2024 presidential election, me, off the ballot. there are still more than a dozen states, by the way, considering petitions to keep trump's name off the ballot. with that said, phil, the michigan court of claims judge who first got the case said that state law in michigan doesn't give officials any lee way to police the eligibility of presidential primary candidates. he also said the case raised a polit

in new york, bill hemmer, fox news. >> molly: looking at the michigan supreme court rejecting an attempt donald trump off the primary ballot coming after the controversial decision by colorado's highest court to remove the former president from the ballot last week. jason chaffetz joins me now, former utah congressman and fox news contributor. we'll start with this issue as we're on the cusp of a new year and election year, of course, great to have you with us. your thoughts on this michigan decision and also does it mean we have more wait now on the potential u.s. supreme court decision related to colorado? >> well, the michigan decision seems reasonable. people tend to forget the government works for the people. the idea that you would exclude somebody from the ballot because of insurrection. donald trump never was charged with that, never convicted of it because he didn't do it. the government never charged it. to try to take him off the ballot was absurd. colorado made the wrong decision, michigan made the right decision. we need to have the supreme court decide on this. we need to g

cheryl: i'm glad you brought up the former president because the michigan supreme court has just rejectedmove him from the state's 2024 republican primary ballot. stating that they were not persuaded the case should be reviewed by the court so the former president reacting on truth social saying, quote, this pathetic gambit to rig the election has failed including in states that heavily lean towards democrats. colorado, the republican party there is asking the supreme court to overturn their state's supreme court ruling disqualifying trump from their state's ballot. what do you make of both of these legal cases, the efforts to remove the former frat the ballot, tom. >> for the most part the courts have refused to join the left's efforts to rig the election by keeping biden -- by keeping trump off the ballot. and in the case of colorado, it's the exception that proves the rule where you had left wing activist justices on the supreme court of colorado intervene in our elections by suggesting without evidence that trump had engaged in some misconduct related to january 6th that requires him

supreme court will likely have the final say on trump's ballot eligibility. last week colorado's supreme court barred trump from colorado's primary ballot, but michigan's supreme court has ruled he can stay on the michigan ballot. at least 16 people have been killed in ukraine after russia launched a massive wave of missile and drone attacks targeting the capital kyiv and other cities, including lviv in the west, odesa and zaporizhzhia in the south, and dnipro and kharkiv in the east. the ukrainian military said it has "never seen so many locations targeted simultaneously." the attacks come days after ukraine struck a russian warship in occupied crimea. meanwhile, "the new york times" is reporting that russian president vladimir putin has been signaling for months through intermediaries for months that he is open to a ceasefire deal that would allow russia to keep ukrainian land it has seized during the war. the u.s. justice department is threatening to sue the state of texas if it begins enforcing a new law empowering police to arrest anyone they suspect to have entered the united states without authorization. the law was signed last week by texas governor gr

today's ruling in michigan is in contrast to the colorado supreme court decision which ruled mr. trump's involvement on and around january 6th disqualifies him. joining me now, nbc news legal analyst, paul butler. paul,et's get into this. the michigan supreme court rejects the case on procedural grounds writing, we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this court. in fact, they never got to the question of whether former president trump actually engaged in the insurrection. apparently, one of the dissenting justices is leave the door open to take this up again. is this the end of the case in michigan? >> absolutely not. the michigan case was decided on procedural grounds. michigan's state law does not allow election officials to decide who is eligible to run in primary elections. in colorado, by contrast, anybody who is seeking the office of president has to attest to their legal qualifications to hold that office. michigan doesn't have a requirement like that. it's really about the difference between primary and general elections. the minnesota supr

the colorado supreme court said, good enough. in michigan, there is no comparable proceeding. e michigan supreme court today essentially said, we don't have a way to do this. my general criticism, complaint about this 14th amendment effort is, i don't believe it's up to the states at all. the 14th amendment is clear on its face that it's up to congress to tell us how this works. they have not delegated that. >> there's no gray area? >> no. this is no go. the only way to do it is based on congress. the amendment, section 5 says congress is to tell us how this works. the only thing congress has done is passed a criminal law many years ago saying it's a crime to commit insurrection. if you do, you are disqualified. complain to congress, because they failed to act. >> i'm glad you said that. george conway, you were skeptical of this entire premise of section 3 of the 14th amendment, barring someone, former president donald trump, from serving again, from qualifying to run for president again. you have changed your mind on that following the ruling from the colorado supreme court. w

you have the michigan supreme court following other ports in refusing to disqualify the former president the supreme court to review. there's a conflict among the states, and it's a very weighty issue here, obviously, for the country. >> kayleigh: it is. you look over at michigan, one of the big victories, and you pointed this out on twitter, now known as x, that democrats actually helped to stop trump from being removed from the ballot. these are justices appointed by democrats. >> right, and i think that's important to remind people, because in this age of rage we often make assumptions about people we don't agree with. it is important to know that this theory has been rejected in various states by democratic judges, judges appointed by democratic governors, or judges that are in fact democrats who ran for office. they showed they could resist temptation, that they have greater fealty to the constitution then they do their own views and their own political preferences. the question now is, will the supreme court intervene? i believe it will. what is interesting about this filing is it

the trump legal team has defiant, that this is an effort by the colorado supreme court in contrast to the michigan supreme court and other places, that the 4-3 ruling was acknowledgement of that, but for ultimately this will be decided by the u.s. supreme court potentially in the weeks, if not months ahead. >>> thank you, vaughn. we move to you, barbara. it seems inevitable that the supreme court will have to subtle it case. what are you expecting? >> i agree with that, alex. the first thing, we've seen the cert opinion filed by the colorado gop. i think the first thing for the supreme court to do there is issue an administrative stay of the ballot that has to begin being prosed on january 5th. that gives them the space to do full briefingnssue and to decide this question, because we're going to start seeing a sort of patchwork of decision coming out as to whether donald trump should be on the ballot. interpreting the 14th amendment is uniquely win the province of the u.s. supreme court. i think they have to take up the case relatively soon. >> sam, to you. lawyers for colorado's republican party

court needs to inject and reject any disinformation -- and what the supreme court calls politics -- into the hearing. meanwhile, the michigan supreme court also had a ruling because we're tracking this over the course of december, we can see this go both ways. but trump will remain on that states ballot, according to the court. and the united states supreme court is not yet getting involved in the doj coup case. jack smith actually was trying to, as you know, speed it up. your thoughts on all of that and what we expect to be, if this trend line continues, in an election year next year, iowa caucus next month, january appeals board, january 9th appeals hearing on this, all of this stuff will keep kicking around? >> it's pretty busy for a slow news day, right? first of all, jack smith when he filed that motion, he was 100% on target, ari. that and all of those points that trump might try to make or his attorneys might try to make during the trial are completely irrelevant as to whether or not he is guilty as charged. it's irrelevant what his thoughts are about joe biden or whether he thinks the prosecution is political. where

supreme court to now intervene and hear an appeal on last week's decision to disqualify him from his role on the january 6th insurrection. in michigantate supreme court just ruled to keep trump on the ballot. in maine, donald trump's attorneys are asking the secretary of state to recuse herself from the decision on whether to keep former president trump on their ballot. joining us now for more on this, vaughn hillyard. vaughn, there is just so much happening right now in multiple states when it comes to trump and keeping him on or off the primary ballot. so, where do things stand right now, first in colorado and the very different case in michigan. >> right. lots of lawsuits. and each lawsuit that donald trump and his legal team are watching, steven. look, michigan's supreme court made the determination that they were not going to disqualify donald trump have the ballot in the state of michigan. this is reflective of state courts around the country. the only state in which a court has made the determination that donald trump should be disqualified is the colorado supreme court. and just last night, the legal team for the colorado re

michigan one now being appeal due to the michigan supreme court. does your office have a position on the lawsuit? >> our position is it is up to the court. it is not a kandura issue. it is a serious one. the allegations are serious. it has serious implications both in this case and in creating a legal precedent that could be applied in other cases, as well. the justice in the supreme court and ultimately the u.s. supreme court need to take this seriously. they need to provide of clarity. which is frankly our only position at this point. we just want to know who to put on the ballot in michigan. as in colorado, frankly. the former president is on the primary ballot until the court rules otherwise. in our case, the u.s. supreme court. we will wait and see how plays. out the clarity for voters with the republican party for election officials is really needed sooner rather than later. we can have some finality in this question before the 2020 election. >> michigan secretary of state, jocelyn benson. thank you for your vigilance and for listing on top o

michigan supreme court had a ruling that will echo for many people because we're tracking this over thee of december, but trump will remain on that state's ballot according to the court and the united states supreme court, of course, is not yet getting involved in the doj coup case. jack smith actually was trying to invite them in, renato, as you know to speed it up. your thoughts on all of that and what we expect to be if this trend line continues an election year next year. i will caucus next months the january appeals court and the january 9th appeal on this, and all of this stuff will keep kicking around. >> pretty busy for a slow news day, right? first, when jack smith filed that motion he was 100% on target, ari. all of the points that they might make during the trial are completely irrelevant, and it's irrelevant about joe biden ore whether he thinks the prosecution's political. of course, the challenge is going to be will judge chutkan be able to shut down the attorneys and in defiance of the order and that's what i anticipate happening. it is a showdown that has occurred crimin

supreme court before the trial can begin. and the supreme court may also have to decide whether or not trump can even be on the ballot in november. just today, the michigan supreme court ruled that trump should be allowed to appear on the ballot in that state. this comes just a week after the colorado supreme court ruled that trump should not appear on that ballot, because of his role in inciting the january sixth insurrection. trump is expected to challenge that colorado ruling before the u.s. supreme court, the filing coming as soon as tonight. and just this evening, the colorado state republican party filed its own appeal, asking the supreme court to allow trump on the ballot. joining me now, a former senior adviser to the attorney general merrick garland and a msnbc legal analysts. also with me is chuck rosenberg, former u.s. attorney and senior fbi official and msnbc contributor. anthony, chuck, it's great to see both of you in person, on set. we got a lot to talk about. let's start with the colorado supreme court ruling. anthony, is it inevitable that the supreme court will get involved in this? >> it absolutely is inevitable that this goes to the

this mini hearing, took five days, back in october in november, and the colorado supreme court said, get enough. in michigan, there is no comparable proceeding. so the michigan supreme court today essentially said, we don't have a way to do this in this state. my general criticism complaint about this 14th amendment effort is, i don't believe it's up to the states at all. i think the 14th amendment is clear on its face that it's up to congress to tell us how this works, and they have not delegated that. >> for you, there's no gray area? >> i think this is no go. i think the only way to do it is based on what congress has done. the amendment itself, section five, says congress is to tell us how this works. the only thing congresses done is they passed a criminal law saying it's a crime to commit insurrection. if you do, you're disqualified. that's not great. if people have a complaint with that, complain to congress. because they failed to act. >> george conway, you are initially skeptical of this entire premise, but section three of the 14th amendment firing someone, a former president, donald trump, from e

fact that every state in america is, in fact, a state within a state was recalled in the michigan supreme courtp be removed from the primary election for his participation in the storming of the capitol. unlike colorado, michigan decided not to take responsibility for this explosive solution. the lawsuit did not even reach consideration; the court rejected it at the appeal stage, saying that the state constitution simply does not have provisions on this matter, and although similar... lawsuits for removal from the race lie in the courts of dozens of other states, trump is celebrating his victory. we got a big win today in michigan. no one can understand why they did this in colorado, probably for pr. maybe they did it for a very liberal left-wing governor, but it's just a shame for the whole world. i think it's very bad for colorado. the fact that it fell to trump to start the clockwork under the very structure of the united states became obvious as...

the michigan supreme court just ruled he could stay on the ballot. but the colorado supreme court recently decided to kick him off. the u.s. supreme court will likely take up the case soon. and belt expects the rule in favor of trump. the court is very loath to try to involve itself. >> in political process is as they're working themselves through. >> with trump far ahead in the polls, his republican rivals are desperately trying to gain ground. ron desantis is campaign has been in a real state of flux. they cram a swami, just canceled all of his tv leading to questions about his campaign's future. it could mean that these just losing steam and doesn't want to put the money into it again. the belt sees former governor nikki haley is the one to watch arguing she has a real chance in the primaries. if she can make the case that number one, she's the real alternative to donald trump. and number 2, she might be more electable than donald trump. and that's exactly what she's telling voters. i every one of those general election polls. and i defeat biden by

you don't see supporters of joe biden going out and threatening michigan supreme court justices.constraining any of his behavior. his words result in violent action. it isn't stopping. he is well aware of what's going on, and i think whatever we see coming out of the supreme court there is going -- they can't unwrite the 14th amendment. there's going to have to be some provision that if somebody engages in insurrection that that does potentially disqualify them from the presidency in some way, some manner of determining that. trump is not going to like that. so the question is, as we move into 2024, we've got a slow boil right now. that pot is just going to get hotter and hotter and hotter on the oven. >> i want you to pick up, frank, if you will about peter's comment of asymmetry that comes as we witness political rhetoric, political violence in this country and what that means for law enforcement institutions as they attempt to track that violence and threats of violence as best they can. >> this does appear to be one sided, and the data does support that in terms of arrests, c

. >>> good news for former president trump, michigan supreme court will not vote to bar him from the state's primary election ballot. contrast the move by the colorado top court last week. discalled the former president for what they say was his role as the january 6th capitol attack. sighting an insurrection clause in the constitution. a bay area nonprofit is helping former inmates transition from prison back into their communities. it is a challenge effecting about 2500 inmates every month in california. this group is serving up hope as they teach them to serve meals. >>> growing up, devon jordan had a lot on his plate. but these days he is able to deal with whatever life dishes out. >> this is probably the further thing from what i envisioned my life to be. >> after being in and out of prison for various offenses for a total of 16 years devon suddenly found himself on the outside with little to know prospects. >> nobody was willing to give me a shot because of my past. but then, he stumbled on a place called farming hope. and went from serving time to serving meals. >> they gave m

can be persuasive, they will not be definitive and i expect our court in michigan to make an independent analysis when it reaches the supreme court hopefully rather soon. >> there is legal and political, michigan is a battleground state, colorado leans blue. do you worry about political fallout in your state if the ruling stands? >> i have said all along, the law is the law and the constitution is what it is, we have a responsibility to follow it and provide clarity to citizens, that clarity is what i'm most concerned about especially with the uncertainty of this moment waiting for other courts to wait in including the u.s. supreme court, the fallout is really going to be routed to the uncertainty and that's why my hope is that the supreme court will not punt at this issue as they potentially could but make a substantive, final decision on this entire issue under the 14th amendment so that going into the primary season, all states and political parties have clarity on who and who is not qualified to serve. >> i appreciate that opinion, what is clarity to you, that is not going to be clarity to everyone, there are people who

the michigan supreme in the us. the michigan supreme court rejected an attempt to remove former president donald trump from the 2024 presidential ballot . the ruling is, in ballot. the ruling is, in contrast with the recent court case in colorado , where mr trump case in colorado, where mr trump was disqualified from running for president in the state due to his alleged role in capitol riots . that decision has been riots. that decision has been paused, though , pending an paused, though, pending an appeal here in the uk. paused, though, pending an appeal here in the uk . a 16 year appeal here in the uk. a 16 year old boy has been arrested on suspicion of arson following a fire at a school in west london. ten fire engines and around 70 firefighters were called to the blaze at the london oratory school at around 10:00 this morning. the london fire brigade said. part of the building has been damaged no injuries been damaged but no injuries have reported . thousands of have been reported. thousands of travellers are facing yet more delays and ca

carrie: this was an important decision from the michigan supreme court but it was a procedural one. rt in that state left open the possibility that trump could be disqualified from the general election ballot but allowed his name to continue on the republican party ballot for the primary. and they decided that on procedural grounds. they did not get to the substance of whether the former president had engaged in insurrection and should be booted off the ballot for that reason. that is one key difference between what the michigan high court did and what the high court did in colorado. in colorado of course we had a five day civil trial where, among other people who testified , was a u.s. capitol police officer who talked about the violence he suffered on january 6, 2021 at the capitol. that court basically found trump should be kicked off the ballot in the state of colorado. the republican party in that state has now pressed the u.s. supreme court to hear that case. geoff: donald trump faces up to five separate trials in 2024. let's start with the special counsel jack smith's election