Please excuse me for going off topic. But I feel compelled to draw attention to an article that I found in The Atlantic, "Supreme Betrayal" by Judge J. Michael Luttig and Professor Lawrence H. Tribe, which was published on March 14. I invite Bulwark readers to take a 20 minute break from the Bulwark and slide over to The Atlantic to read…
Please excuse me for going off topic. But I feel compelled to draw attention to an article that I found in The Atlantic, "Supreme Betrayal" by Judge J. Michael Luttig and Professor Lawrence H. Tribe, which was published on March 14. I invite Bulwark readers to take a 20 minute break from the Bulwark and slide over to The Atlantic to read their critique of the Supreme Court's Trump v. Anderson decision See: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/03/supreme-court-trump-v-anderson-fourteenth-amendment/677755/
If anyone can refute or even argue convincingly against Luttig's and Tribe's arguments please post it here. I would relish very much to read convincing counter-arguments and challenges to their reasoning.
Of course, I cannot add anything to Luttig's and Tribe's critique. But I do wonder if the Supreme Court may have been, in part, motivated by fear - and understandably so. I am reminded of a popular film that is now in our movie theaters across the country and a line from it: "I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little death that brings total obliteration..." For those who are not beguiled and who have not succumbed to deranged propaganda, or for those who are not ruled by fear of what may come from applying the law plainly, the facts and the law were plain to see. I marvel at how many elegant articulations and turns of phrase have been used to strain out gnats in order to swallow a camel. It is safe to assume that Trump will bring us more violence when his will is thwarted by the rule of law and the Constitution - as will inevitably happen because he has been at war with those things for many years. The question is when to face that violence: Sooner or Later? And everyone involved thus far, including the Senate and the Supreme Court, who have been confronted with that question have answered it apparently under the influence of fear rather than under the influence of truth, courage and logic which are necessary if we are to have rule of law and a Constitution.
Please excuse me for going off topic. But I feel compelled to draw attention to an article that I found in The Atlantic, "Supreme Betrayal" by Judge J. Michael Luttig and Professor Lawrence H. Tribe, which was published on March 14. I invite Bulwark readers to take a 20 minute break from the Bulwark and slide over to The Atlantic to read their critique of the Supreme Court's Trump v. Anderson decision See: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/03/supreme-court-trump-v-anderson-fourteenth-amendment/677755/
If anyone can refute or even argue convincingly against Luttig's and Tribe's arguments please post it here. I would relish very much to read convincing counter-arguments and challenges to their reasoning.
Of course, I cannot add anything to Luttig's and Tribe's critique. But I do wonder if the Supreme Court may have been, in part, motivated by fear - and understandably so. I am reminded of a popular film that is now in our movie theaters across the country and a line from it: "I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little death that brings total obliteration..." For those who are not beguiled and who have not succumbed to deranged propaganda, or for those who are not ruled by fear of what may come from applying the law plainly, the facts and the law were plain to see. I marvel at how many elegant articulations and turns of phrase have been used to strain out gnats in order to swallow a camel. It is safe to assume that Trump will bring us more violence when his will is thwarted by the rule of law and the Constitution - as will inevitably happen because he has been at war with those things for many years. The question is when to face that violence: Sooner or Later? And everyone involved thus far, including the Senate and the Supreme Court, who have been confronted with that question have answered it apparently under the influence of fear rather than under the influence of truth, courage and logic which are necessary if we are to have rule of law and a Constitution.