Supreme Court Rules On Trump’s Insurrection Case?

Photo by Claire Anderson on Unsplash

( – Former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani said that it was necessary for the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene so that there is no more confusion related to former President Donald Trump’s role in the insurrection.

In an interview with Newsweek, Rahmani argued that following the decision of the secretary of state of Maine on Thursday, who decided that Trump would be blocked from appearing on the 2024 Republican primary ballot in the state over his connection with the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol insurrection, the topic of Trump and the insurrection had turned into a constitutional issue.

Rahmani pointed out that the legal question relating to Trump was novel and had a lot of constitutional importance. He further pointed out that while it was up to the discretion of the Supreme Court what it would do, stepping in could answer the constitutional questions relating to this case. As he argued, the Supreme Court needed to put an end to all confusion relating to the 14th Amendment’s Section 3, which is a post-Civil War section aiming to block those who had engaged in insurrection against the country from ever holding office again.

As he pointed out, while everyone knew what the amendment said, there was no one who could issue a definitive ruling on how it is meant to be enforced. He further pointed out that depending on the decisions made by the Maine courts following the ruling, it was possible that a second insurrection state could end up appearing before the Supreme Court. He further suggested that the justices may choose to consolidate the cases.

Copyright 2024,