West
Unanimous Supreme Court in Colorado vs. Trump tells us this about our legal elites
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
In the end, the Supreme Court’s ruling on the issue of whether a state can kick Donald Trump off its presidential ballot for having engaged in insurrection, under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, was anticlimactic. A legal theory that had won the hearts of law professors across the country – barely half a year from law review article to Supreme Court opinion is a record that won’t be beat – swayed the mind of exactly zero justices.
Because “the Constitution makes Congress, rather than the states, responsible for enforcing Section 3 against federal officeholders and candidates,” state courts and state officials have no power to remove federal candidates from the ballot, the court unanimously held. Congress’s power under Section 5 of the 14th Amendment to pass “appropriate” legislation “is critical when it comes to Section 3.”
While the states retain sovereign power to determine the qualifications of their own state officeholders, they have no such power with regard to federal officeholders.
Former President Donald Trump arrives for an election-night watch party at Mar-a-Lago on March 5, 2024, in West Palm Beach, Florida. (Win McNamee/Getty Images)
That’s it. End of story, without the need to engage in a battle of dictionaries to define “insurrection” or parsing of Trump’s actions to determine whether he had engaged in it. No abstruse debates over whether the presidency is an “office under the United States” or whether Trump was an “officer of the United States.”
DEMOCRATS RUSH TO KEEP TRUMP OFF BALLOT AFTER SCOTUS DECISION BECAUSE ELECTION CAN’T BE LEFT TO VOTERS
There’s a certain elegance to the simple off-ramp that all nine justices chose, forestalling further partisan toxicity and avoiding any labeling of a “MAGA court” and the like.
Now, there was certainly disagreement over whether the court needed to go further and decide that the only way to enforce Section 3 is through legislation. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh said yes, while Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and, separately, Amy Coney Barrett took no position. They would’ve preferred to leave the question open, leaving open the possibility that another federal actor, like a judge or the Justice Department, could enforce Section 3 the same way they enforce more familiar parts of the 14th Amendment, like the due process clause and equal protection clause.
TRUMP SAYS SUPREME COURT RULING IN COLORADO CASE IS ‘UNIFYING AND INSPIRATIONAL’
But then the same parties might have filed suit in federal court and we’d be back in the same place a few months down the line, even closer to the election. Or, even worse, Congress might have taken it upon itself to reject Trump electors during the vote certification on Jan. 6, 2025 – which would again result in emergency Supreme Court filings.
No, the more I consider it, the more I think it was wise to head off any such shenanigans and nip these easily foreseeable developments in the bud.
But regardless, the justices were quite concerned that a ruling in Colorado’s favor would result in a “patchwork” of rules such that the same person would be eligible in some places and not in others, a sort of Schrödinger’s candidate. That’s no way to run a presidential election.
None of this was apparent to most of our esteemed legal scholars, however. Although the idea of using an obscure constitutional provision to disqualify Trump originated with originalists – most of the interesting theoretical debates are among right-leaning academics, rather than with liberal lions who can’t even figure out how to teach con law when the Supreme Court actually applies what the Constitution says – it really took off among those who would gleefully deny voters their preference in the name of “democracy.”
That’s a damning indictment of our legal elites at a time when the illiberal takeover of law schools is subverting open inquiry and poo-pooing the rule of law to those who will be the gatekeepers of our political institutions in coming decades.
There’s a direct line between the transformation of education into intersectional activism – such that law students shout down federal judges and sign letters supporting Hamas – and the inability to see how a clever theory for getting rid of a controversial populist wouldn’t survive contact with reality.
But the Supreme Court won’t always be there to save us, particularly if that same legal and media elite continues its campaign to delegitimize an institution that remains much more popular than any other part of the government.
That’s why it’s important to continue to call out the rampant gaslighting in our midst. Not for Donald Trump, but for the health of our American polity.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM ILYA SHAPIRO
Read the full article from Here
San Francisco, CA
Court document details attack on SF mayor’s bodyguard as Lurie responds to incident
SAN FRANCISCO (KGO) — For the first time since the attack on San Francisco Mayor Daniel Lurie’s bodyguard, one of the suspects was in court on Tuesday afternoon.
On Monday, District Attorney Brooke Jenkins filed charges against the man. Those charges include:
- Resisting an executive officer
- Assault with force to cause bodily injury
- Willful disobedience of a court order
- Unlawful lodging at the same location from a previous citation
Mayor Daniel Lurie said the incident won’t deter him from walking the streets of the city doing what he was doing moments before his bodyguard was attacked last week.
PREVIOUS STORY: SF mayor was ‘worried’ about 2 men on street, checked on them before bodyguard attack
Multiple angles covered a dramatic altercation between one of San Francisco Mayor Daniel Lurie’s security detail and individuals on the street.
“I think I need to be able to see it myself and not just stay cloistered up and not be out of the streets. I walked the streets this morning and had some great interactions and was able to help some people,” said Mayor Lurie.
We obtained the detention motion, which revealed specific details about the incident.
The document said Mayor Lurie was riding in a car northbound on Larking Street with two of his security detail. The mayor asked the driver to stop and got out of the car with one of the officers to approach four people who were blocking the road; “two were sitting on the sidewalk… one was actually sitting in the street.” The document says one of the individuals “was aggressive” and “stepped towards the mayor,” after he asked them to move out of the road a few times. This led the bodyguard to position himself between the mayor and the individual. The document states the individual “got very close” to the officer and threatened him and said, “Bruce Lee I’ll kick your a**!”
The officer, according to the document, proceeded to shove the individual away from him “with both hands to defend himself and to create distance,” causing the individual to fall backwards on the sidewalk.
The individual quickly stood up and “rushed at the officer.”
Multiple people in the area captured the altercation on video.
We asked the mayor if he would do anything different in the future.
INTERACTIVE: Take a look at the ABC7 Neighborhood Safety Tracker
“I’m not going to stop doing it. I will consult with our detail and our chief and make sure we can do this safely,” said Mayor Lurie.
San Francisco Supervisor Rafael Mandelman said he is glad the mayor sees the crisis on the streets up close.
“A lot of people will cross the street to get away from it hide from it. We don’t want our city hiding from this problem,” said Supervisor Mandelman.
Kevin Benedicto, vice president of the San Francisco police commission, said they will be looking into the incident.
“A number of commissioners are going to want to ask the chief about updates about the incident just to make sure we have all the policies and procedures in place,” said Benedicto.
The Individual who attacked the mayor’s bodyguard has been charged in the past for criminal threats in 2019 and 2020.
One of the arraignments is set for Wednesday at 9 a.m.
Copyright © 2026 KGO-TV. All Rights Reserved.
Denver, CO
Our dumpling challenge boils down to eight Denver metro restaurants
Like sand through the hourglass, so too go the dumplings of the Denver Post’s annual food bracket.
Our competition started with 32 restaurants chosen by editors and readers specializing in dumplings and momos, a Tibetan and Nepali variation, in the Denver area. Two weeks later, only eight restaurants remain.
The next round of matchups in our Elite 8 competition to be decided by reader votes are:
Rocky Mountain Momo (9678 E. Arapahoe Road, Englewood) vs. ChoLon (multiple locations)
LingLon Dumpling House (2456 S. Colorado Blvd., Denver) vs. Star Kitchen (2917 W. Mississippi Ave., Denver)
Nana’s Dim Sum & Dumplings (multiple locations) vs. Dillon’s Dumpling House (3571 S. Tower Road, Unit G, Aurora)
Hop Alley (3500 Larimer St., Denver) vs. Momo Dumplings (caterer; momo-dumplings.com)
The most recent matchups recorded more than 460 entries. Our most popular head-to-head was Rocky Mountain Momo facing off against Yuan Wonton. Rocky Mountain Momo advances with 55% of 260 votes.
MAKfam, a Chinese restaurant with a Michelin nod for its value, faced a tough first-round opponent, The Empress Seafood, and scraped out a win. But this time, it wasn’t as lucky, losing to ChoLon, an upscale Asian fusion restaurant with multiple locations, by only five votes.
Make your picks below for who should advance to the next round. The online voting form will close at 11:59 p.m. on Sunday, March 15.
Subscribe to our new food newsletter, Stuffed, to get Denver food and drink news sent straight to your inbox.
Seattle, WA
Seattle goal overturned for goalie interference as Predators complete 4-2 comeback win
SEATTLE — Ryan Ufko scored his first NHL goal with 5:35 to play in the second period to put the Nashville Predators ahead to stay in a 4-2 win over the Seattle Kraken on Tuesday night.
The rookie skated in from the right of the goal, dodged between two defenders, and tucked the puck past Seattle goalie Joey Daccord to give the Predators a 3-2 lead and two critical points in their chase for a wild-card playoff spot. Right now, the team is on the outside of the playoff picture.
Tyson Jost and Reid Schaefer also scored second-period goals to erase Seattle’s 2-0 first-period lead, and Steve Stamkos added an empty-netter for his 31st goal of the season.
Jonathan Marchessault had a pair of assists for Nashville, which had lost four of its previous five, and Juuse Saros made 43 saves.
Kaapo Kakko scored just 2:14 into the game, and Matty Beniers scored at 9:46 of the first period to give the Kraken a 2-0 lead. Beniers scored from a tough angle, firing from the bottom of the right circle and over the shoulder of Saros just inside the far post.
Daccord finished with 23 saves.
Seattle’s Shane Wright scored a goal in the second, but it was waved off because of goalie interference when Ryker Evans slid into Saros and took out his feet.
The Kraken were without left wing Jaden Schwartz, who was hit in the face by a skate during Seattle’s 7-4 loss to Ottawa on Saturday.
Kraken, clinging to a wild-card slot, have now lost five of their last seven games.
Up next
Predators: Visit Vancouver on Thursday night.
BE THE FIRST TO COMMENT
Kraken: Host Colorado on Thursday night.
-
Wisconsin1 week agoSetting sail on iceboats across a frozen lake in Wisconsin
-
Massachusetts1 week agoMassachusetts man awaits word from family in Iran after attacks
-
Pennsylvania6 days agoPa. man found guilty of raping teen girl who he took to Mexico
-
Detroit, MI5 days agoU.S. Postal Service could run out of money within a year
-
Miami, FL7 days agoCity of Miami celebrates reopening of Flagler Street as part of beautification project
-
Sports6 days agoKeith Olbermann under fire for calling Lou Holtz a ‘scumbag’ after legendary coach’s death
-
Virginia7 days agoGiants will hold 2026 training camp in West Virginia
-
Culture1 week agoTry This Quiz on the Real Locations in These Magical and Mysterious Novels