If you’re a regular reader of ours, you know I have a great disdain for “The View” and most of the women who co-host the program. This, of course, probably has many individuals wondering why in the heck I write about them so much if I can’t stand them. The simple answer is, I enjoy poking fun of them and the insanity of their ideas. Which is why, I am here, once again writing a piece about the worst morning talk show on television.
However, on Monday, the ladies on the show actually had a good opinion to share on a top news story of the day. I can’t believe that sentence just came out of my mouth. Maybe the end of the world is nigh after all?
The Supreme Court of the United States ruled unanimously that former President Donald Trump must be allowed to stay on the ballot in the state of Colorado, despite the state’s Supreme Court disqualifying him by citing Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, claiming he started an “insurrection” on Jan. 6, 2021. Two other states, Maine and Illinois, joined with Colorado in booting Trump from the GOP primary ballot. However, those fights are now over too.
Here’s more from the Daily Caller:
“I actually think it was the right decision to make because it would’ve, you know, if Colorado had been allowed to do that we’d have this chaotic sort of process where you have 50 states, and some are choosing to put him on the ballot and some are choosing not to put him on the ballot,” co-host Sunny Hostin said. “So that’s why this decision was unanimous in judgment.”
Hostin complained that the court politically overstepped by allegedly allowing Trump to remain in office unchallenged, and said the court should have simply answered the question on whether a state can make this sort of decision. She said she had “far too much hope” that the justices would not “overstep in favor of Donald Trump,” but said some of the justices acted in “a partisan manner.”
“Instead, what they did was insulated — all alleged insurrectionists from future challenges to their holding federal office. And it is a tenant of Supreme Court law … it says what it does today the court should’ve left undone and we always learn that in law school. The Supreme Court should just answer the question before it, and I had far too much hope that the court would be united in this and not overstep in favor of Donald Trump. And I think what we saw was a court that behaved in a partisan manner, and that disappoints me.”
Something a lot of progressives don’t seem to be thinking about is how a ruling against Trump would have negatively impacted the Democratic Party too. Do you really think Republicans wouldn’t immediately launch similar efforts against Biden? Many red states would easily have such a decision passed too. It would be, as noted above, chaos.
The court ruled Congress, rather than the states, has the power to enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which bars insurrectionists from holding office. The decision further stated that Colorado’s decision could cause chaos in future elections, writing that an “evolving electoral map could dramatically change the behavior of voters, parties, and States across the country, in different ways and at different times.”
“Because the Constitution makes Congress, rather than the States, responsible for enforcing Section 3 against federal officeholders and candidates, we reverse,” the decision went on to say.
“I think it was the right decision, not a welcome one — it can sometimes be the right thing precedentially but also maybe you worry about it for the country. But the justices were always gonna look at what could this mean ten, twenty years down the road,” fellow co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin remarked. “And to Ana’s point, there was also a Missouri secretary of state, a Republican Secretary of State, who threatened to keep Biden off the ballot under the same decision, so it does open a bit of a slippery slope.”
Griffin then added, “But I think the takeaway from today is this: the only place to beat Donald Trump is at the ballot box and the way to do that — yes, you have to litigate his anti-constitutional stances — but we also have to pay attention to the issues that the voters that are still with him care about.”
When the court rules unanimously, that means, more than likely, they have the correct interpretation of the Constitution. This was a blatant assault on the people of the United States and their freedom to choose a candidate that best aligns with their views. I’m glad to see this effort was thwarted.
"*" indicates required fields
