This is a remarkably positive and optimistic appraisal Jerry. That it is well thought out and rationally argued makes it also very encouraging. Thanks for taking the time; we must now hope that your arguments are accurately predictive.
I watched January 6 in absolute horror. I agree with Liz Cheney on almost nothing, but one thing. How can insurrection be incited by a president, but that president not be held to account before the next election? For me, it's the timeframe, not the election that is my concern. The former president should be held to account for his behavior. It's the accountability, or lack thereof, that matters to me. The more time that passes without accountability, the more emboldened a perpetrator becomes.
Your arguments are food for thought. Our institutions do need protection, but that doesn't mean that they don't need reform. The Supreme Court does need to be accountable on some level.
Thanks, Jenn. Your are right about the need for reform--it's undeniable. The report of the Presidential Commission that I included in the post is essential reading for a serious discussion of options.
Regarding the timeframe, the crimes were committed in January 2021. But the indictment was not filed until August 2023. Trump's immunity claim didn't get to the Supreme Court until February 2024. It seems to me that the Court isn't really the source of that problem.
No, the Court is not the source of the accountability issue. Our collective political will is the source of that problem, I think. It's important to respect the office of the presidency, but no person is more important than the office. Being an elected official or running for election should not be a get out of jail free card. We cannot make idols of those people who hold office, no matter what office. The "small fry" should not be held accountable, but the big fish go free in the case of January 6. Donald Trump has exposed cracks and flaws in our system of governance that we didn't recognize were there. Did anyone ever consider a felon serving in elected office from a jail cell? Does that even seem logical?
Again, thank you for your thought provoking essay.
I commend you for your unbiased and fairly written editorial. If the "Rule of Law" is to be honored and followed as a key measure of our democracy, then it has to be followed at all times, for all people, and for all pertinent legal issues--period.
Well said! Thank you for this very helpful explanation. I needed a less reactive perspective. Fear can really get in the way of rationality. And hope is always welcomed.
I’m less than enthusiastic about your findings and interpretations.
I am one of those rabid progressives who have seen the Right wing of the Supreme Court always err on the side of , well, the right wing.
The approach of those Justices on April 25, 2024 was in my humble opinion, bizarre.
Beside the grandiose thoughts that they’ d settle this as “one for the ages”, it seemed reasonable to me that they might consider the claims of Donald Trump and the circumstances of the question at issue.
Their obvious talent for tangential thoughts aside, this wasn’t something that has been claimed by any other multiply indicted ex president to date . Of course , we all know why Trump was the first .
The Court , in my opinion, has never strayed into backing a progressive agenda when ruling on a case in recent years.
Let’s think Bush v Gore …. Of course it had to be ruled on the way it was there certainly was no time to count the actual votes mixed in with those with . alleged ‘ hanging Chad’s’ , please.
Of course in the final count Gore won . Oh just a little mistake there.
The Voting Rights Act, get rid of it . We all know there is no Racism in this Country.
The creative and diabolical approach of the Republicans to suppress voter rolls has gotten worse every day. Let’s not pretend that these parties all are on the same page with their partisan atrocities.
The Republican appointees on the Court have consistently backed the wealthiest Americans.
There has been no action that backs the concept of Democracy and Freedom .
The overturn of Roe v Wade related to Christian Nationalists who have been given power by whom?
They never even thought or gave a thought to the disasters in health care by providers and women’s healthcare.
It’s a travesty . Settled law for fifty years , what was the impetus for the change . Why the Far Right Alleged Christians who think they decide what everyone needs to believe and do, whispered it in the ear of …. The Far Right contingent of the Supreme Court.
The chaos created by this group who display absolute intolerance of anyone that doesn’t agree with them is remarkable .
I will be interested to see what the ruling of the court will be for Trump. They’ve already delayed things nicely for Trump .
Jack Smith requested a timely consideration of this so that these cases might be brought to trial in a reasonable time .
They ignored that request .
So , I am sorry but there is a lot more to consider here . In assessing the intentions of this Court.
Thanks for your comment, Patricia. For the most part I agree with you, particularly in regard to the reactionary rulings of this conservative majority. And like you, I would have preferred that the Court just deny Trump's total immunity claim so the trial could proceed without further delay.
But I also can understand that such a denial might be insufficient to dispose of the issue. Just ruling that a president does not enjoy total immunity would still leave open the question of whether he enjoys some immunity. So there's good reason to explore that question preemptively, rather than wait for it to be raised at a later date -- which it surely would be.
Five of the six conservative justices almost always do Trump’s bidding. Roberts does it nearly as much as his conservative colleagues. They deserve no praise. The other three justices, the liberals, have no voice or sway.
I offer no praise of the six conservative Justices. But I don't agree that they "do Trump's bidding." Their opinions and decisions would be just as bad even if there were no Trump. It's just who they are.
The Supreme Court hears about a hundred cases every year. Donald Trump doesn't have the brain power, or even the attention span, to understand the issues raised in a single one of those cases, including his own.
Fortunately, the two worst (Thomas and Alito) are both about 75 years old. If we do our job of electing Democrats to the Presidency and the Senate, the balance could flip in the near future.
This is a remarkably positive and optimistic appraisal Jerry. That it is well thought out and rationally argued makes it also very encouraging. Thanks for taking the time; we must now hope that your arguments are accurately predictive.
I watched January 6 in absolute horror. I agree with Liz Cheney on almost nothing, but one thing. How can insurrection be incited by a president, but that president not be held to account before the next election? For me, it's the timeframe, not the election that is my concern. The former president should be held to account for his behavior. It's the accountability, or lack thereof, that matters to me. The more time that passes without accountability, the more emboldened a perpetrator becomes.
Your arguments are food for thought. Our institutions do need protection, but that doesn't mean that they don't need reform. The Supreme Court does need to be accountable on some level.
Thanks, Jenn. Your are right about the need for reform--it's undeniable. The report of the Presidential Commission that I included in the post is essential reading for a serious discussion of options.
Regarding the timeframe, the crimes were committed in January 2021. But the indictment was not filed until August 2023. Trump's immunity claim didn't get to the Supreme Court until February 2024. It seems to me that the Court isn't really the source of that problem.
No, the Court is not the source of the accountability issue. Our collective political will is the source of that problem, I think. It's important to respect the office of the presidency, but no person is more important than the office. Being an elected official or running for election should not be a get out of jail free card. We cannot make idols of those people who hold office, no matter what office. The "small fry" should not be held accountable, but the big fish go free in the case of January 6. Donald Trump has exposed cracks and flaws in our system of governance that we didn't recognize were there. Did anyone ever consider a felon serving in elected office from a jail cell? Does that even seem logical?
Again, thank you for your thought provoking essay.
I commend you for your unbiased and fairly written editorial. If the "Rule of Law" is to be honored and followed as a key measure of our democracy, then it has to be followed at all times, for all people, and for all pertinent legal issues--period.
Well said! Thank you for this very helpful explanation. I needed a less reactive perspective. Fear can really get in the way of rationality. And hope is always welcomed.
I like this and interpret it as a sort of another side of the coin argument/presentation with hope on top!
I’m less than enthusiastic about your findings and interpretations.
I am one of those rabid progressives who have seen the Right wing of the Supreme Court always err on the side of , well, the right wing.
The approach of those Justices on April 25, 2024 was in my humble opinion, bizarre.
Beside the grandiose thoughts that they’ d settle this as “one for the ages”, it seemed reasonable to me that they might consider the claims of Donald Trump and the circumstances of the question at issue.
Their obvious talent for tangential thoughts aside, this wasn’t something that has been claimed by any other multiply indicted ex president to date . Of course , we all know why Trump was the first .
The Court , in my opinion, has never strayed into backing a progressive agenda when ruling on a case in recent years.
Let’s think Bush v Gore …. Of course it had to be ruled on the way it was there certainly was no time to count the actual votes mixed in with those with . alleged ‘ hanging Chad’s’ , please.
Of course in the final count Gore won . Oh just a little mistake there.
The Voting Rights Act, get rid of it . We all know there is no Racism in this Country.
The creative and diabolical approach of the Republicans to suppress voter rolls has gotten worse every day. Let’s not pretend that these parties all are on the same page with their partisan atrocities.
The Republican appointees on the Court have consistently backed the wealthiest Americans.
There has been no action that backs the concept of Democracy and Freedom .
The overturn of Roe v Wade related to Christian Nationalists who have been given power by whom?
They never even thought or gave a thought to the disasters in health care by providers and women’s healthcare.
It’s a travesty . Settled law for fifty years , what was the impetus for the change . Why the Far Right Alleged Christians who think they decide what everyone needs to believe and do, whispered it in the ear of …. The Far Right contingent of the Supreme Court.
The chaos created by this group who display absolute intolerance of anyone that doesn’t agree with them is remarkable .
I will be interested to see what the ruling of the court will be for Trump. They’ve already delayed things nicely for Trump .
Jack Smith requested a timely consideration of this so that these cases might be brought to trial in a reasonable time .
They ignored that request .
So , I am sorry but there is a lot more to consider here . In assessing the intentions of this Court.
Thanks for your comment, Patricia. For the most part I agree with you, particularly in regard to the reactionary rulings of this conservative majority. And like you, I would have preferred that the Court just deny Trump's total immunity claim so the trial could proceed without further delay.
But I also can understand that such a denial might be insufficient to dispose of the issue. Just ruling that a president does not enjoy total immunity would still leave open the question of whether he enjoys some immunity. So there's good reason to explore that question preemptively, rather than wait for it to be raised at a later date -- which it surely would be.
Five of the six conservative justices almost always do Trump’s bidding. Roberts does it nearly as much as his conservative colleagues. They deserve no praise. The other three justices, the liberals, have no voice or sway.
Thanks for joining the convo, Hollywood.
I offer no praise of the six conservative Justices. But I don't agree that they "do Trump's bidding." Their opinions and decisions would be just as bad even if there were no Trump. It's just who they are.
The Supreme Court hears about a hundred cases every year. Donald Trump doesn't have the brain power, or even the attention span, to understand the issues raised in a single one of those cases, including his own.
Fortunately, the two worst (Thomas and Alito) are both about 75 years old. If we do our job of electing Democrats to the Presidency and the Senate, the balance could flip in the near future.