News
‘The Supreme Court Must Be Stopped’: Liberal Pundits Melt Down after Justices Refuse to Do Their Bidding in Colorado Ballot Case
The Court ruled unanimously that the states do not have the right to disqualify candidates for allegedly violating the insurrection clause.
Welcome back to Forgotten Fact Checks, a weekly column produced by National Review’s News Desk. This week, we look at the liberal meltdown over the Supreme Court’s ruling on former president Donald Trump’s ballot eligibility, question a local outlet’s coverage of the UGA murder, and cover more media misses.
Supreme Court Ruling on Trump Eligibility Sends Liberals over the Edge
Liberal pundits had a predictable reaction to the Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling on Monday overturning the Colorado supreme court decision to remove Trump from the state primary ballot.
The ruling, which comes just one day before Super Tuesday, holds that only Congress has the authority to restrict ballot access based on a candidate’s alleged violation of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which prohibits individuals who have engaged in an insurrection from holding federal office.
“This case raises the question whether the States, in addition to Congress, may also enforce Section 3. We conclude that States may disqualify persons holding or attempting to hold state office. But States have no power under the Constitution to enforce Section 3 with respect to federal offices, especially the Presidency,” the ruling reads.
“For the reasons given, responsibility for enforcing Section 3 against federal officeholders and candidates rests with Congress and not the States. The judgment of the Colorado Supreme Court therefore cannot stand,” the opinion adds.
And even though liberal justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson agreed with the ruling — though they did express some dissent at how the conservative justices arrived at the decision — that didn’t stop liberals from using the decision as evidence that the Court should be upended.
“The Supreme Court has betrayed democracy,” Keith Olbermann wrote in a post on X. “Its members including Jackson, Kagan and Sotomayor have proved themselves inept at reading comprehension. And collectively the ‘court’ has shown itself to be corrupt and illegitimate. It must be dissolved.”
The Nation justice correspondent Elie Mystal shared a column he wrote last week and said, “Anyway, as I said last week: The Supreme Court must be stopped.” He argued in that column that “the court is fundamentally antidemocratic—and the only way to limit the damage it can do is to reduce its power, budget, and lack of accountability.”
Aaron Rupar shared his own dishonest take:
War is peace. Allowing the insurrectionist who attempted a coup to run for president is a win for democracy. pic.twitter.com/4CVWvBTw0O
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) March 4, 2024
And news coverage of the decision wasn’t much better.
The Associated Press made clear its bias on the issue in its framing of the decision: “Supreme Court restores Trump to ballot, rejecting state attempts to hold him accountable for attack on Capitol in 2021.”
NBC’s Ken Dilanian offered a “people are saying” criticism of the Court’s decision.
“This is another example among many that are playing out right now of the Supreme Court playing a huge role in American elections, and it’s not necessarily the case that that’s a good thing for the Supreme Court. The approval levels of the court poll at historic lows. . . . It’s going to be seen by many people as the court essentially interfering in some sense in the election, and so this is all sort of playing out here in terms of how we assess the Supreme Court and its legacy.”’
MSNBC’s Donna Edwards said, “Not since Bush v. Gore have we seen a Court that’s had this many opportunities to interfere in the election.”
Journalist Brian Beutler presented this not-so-helpful summary of events: “9-0 that the Constitution doesn’t apply to Donald Trump, 5-4 that Republican presidents can attempt coups all they want.”
And from Democratic strategist Max Burns:
SCOTUS: States have total control over their elections
COLORADO: We’re disqualifying Donald Trump from the ballot
SCOTUS: No not like that
— Max Burns (@themaxburns) March 4, 2024
Balls and Strikes editor in chief Jay Willis shared the Court’s opinion with a vulgar take: “BREAKING: Useless A**holes Remain Useless.”
New Republic contributing editor Osita Nwanevu writes, “In other words, if your party holds a majority in Congress and supports you, you can attempt to overthrow the government without being disqualified from future office if you fail.”
But slander of the Court started well before its most recent decision.
Just last week, late-night host Stephen Colbert declared the Supreme Court unconstitutional.
“Aggravated by the latest delay in Donald Trump’s election subversion trial, Colbert unleashed ‘the power vested in me as a late-night host’ against the court,” the New York Times reported under a “Best of Late Night” header.
And former House speaker Nancy Pelosi said the Court is separately “placing itself on trial with its decision to hear the former president’s total immunity claim.”
“It remains to be seen whether the justices will uphold the fundamental American value that no one is above the law — not even a former president,” Pelosi said.
Headline Fail of the Week
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution laid bare its unusual priorities in coverage of the murder of Georgia nursing student Laken Riley: “‘Not fair’: After UGA killing, Venezuelans in Georgia worry about backlash.”
“The death of Laken Riley has made Athens the face of this country’s immigration debate. Local immigrants and their advocates are concerned,” the outlet reports after Jose Antonio Ibarra, an illegal immigrant from Venezuela, allegedly killed Riley when she was out for a run on the UGA campus last month.
Ibarra entered the country in September 2022 and was released into the U.S. via parole, according to Immigration and Customs Enforcement. He was arrested in New York City in September 2023 for acting in a manner to injure a child under 17, but he was released by local police before a detainer could be issued.
Media Misses
• For readers who have somehow found there to be a shortage of progressive media coverage, former MSNBC host Mehdi Hasan plans to valiantly step in to fill the “gap in the market” with his own media company. “I believe there is a craving for media organizations that don’t shy away from saying the truth, even if it’s uncomfortable, even if it bothers people, even if it hinders access, even if it shakes the apple cart,” Hasan told the Washington Post. “From a purely business perspective, there is a gap in the market.”
• Journalist Eugene Scott said in a post on X that he is “reminded quite often that you do not have to be white to support white supremacy.” Nikole Hannah-Jones jumped in to create her own definition of the phrase: “Also, whiteness is not static and it is expandable when necessary. A lot of folks we don’t think of as white think of themselves as white because the lines have never been entirely clear. That’s the beauty of white supremacy — it is extremely adaptable.”
• Palestinian writer and poet Mohammed El-Kurd is upset that protesters can no longer hijack planes and throw Molotov cocktails the way you could in the good ole days:
You can’t protest peacefully. You can’t boycott. You can’t hunger strike. You can’t hijack planes. You can’t block traffic. You can’t throw Molotovs. You can’t self-immolate. You can’t heckle politicians. You can’t march. You can’t riot. You can’t dissent. You just can’t be.
— Mohammed El-Kurd (@m7mdkurd) February 26, 2024