Supreme Court Accused Of Betraying Democracy

Photo by Claire Anderson on Unsplash

( – J. Michael Luttig, a former federal judge, strongly criticized the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision allowing former President Trump to run for office again, despite allegations of insurrection. This ruling came after challenges to Trump’s eligibility, based on the 14th Amendment’s insurrection clause, were made in various states due to his involvement in the January 6 Capitol incident.

Luttig, who served on the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and is known for his conservative views, expressed his disappointment in The Atlantic. He believed the Supreme Court failed democracy by ruling that only Congress has the power to enforce the 14th Amendment to disqualify candidates from federal office.

He argued that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment serves as a crucial safeguard for American democracy, meant to automatically prevent anyone who has committed insurrection against the Constitution from holding office, unless Congress decides otherwise. Luttig viewed the Supreme Court’s decision as a grave abandonment of its duty to uphold the Constitution, effectively nullifying this protective provision.

Countering the notion that excluding Trump from the ballot would be undemocratic, Luttig insisted that the true threat to democracy was the act of insurrection, as clearly outlined in the Constitution. He lamented that this clause had never been needed to block constitutional traitors from office until now, indicating its deterrent effect on significant threats to the government.

Luttig, who had already expressed these views in a legal brief, criticized the Supreme Court for failing to fulfill its constitutional role and instead solidifying perceptions of it as a political entity. He condemned this action especially at a critical time for American democracy and constitutional integrity, emphasizing the need for the Court to prioritize legal principles over political considerations.

Copyright 2024,