WASHINGTON — The biggest event that rocked the nation’s capital this week took place in Colorado, when the state’s Supreme Court ruled former President Trump is disqualified from holding office again because he engaged in insurrection with his role in the Jan. 6 storming of the U.S. Capitol.
The ruling, which would keep Trump’s name off the GOP primary ballot (it did not address the general election), touched off a firestorm of protests from GOP lawmakers.
“Unprecedented: Activist liberal judges just removed @Real Donald Trump from the ballot in Colorado. This is blatant election interference. The U.S. Supreme Court must reverse this decision,” Rep. Tom Emmer, R-6th District, posted on X right after the Colorado court issued its opinion Tuesday.
And Rep. Brad Finstad, R-1st District, weighed in with this: “Every American should be troubled by yesterday’s decision by Colorado’s Supreme Court. Preventing a qualified candidate from a state ballot is nothing short of election interference and a weaponization of the electoral process. I look forward to SCOTUS overruling this…”
Trump’s campaign said it would appeal the Colorado court’s decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Colorado Supreme Court was the first in the nation to find that what’s known as the “insurrection clause” of the 14th Amendment — which disqualifies from public office people who engage in insurrection against the U.S. Constitution after taking an oath to support it — applies to Trump.
The clause, known as Section 3, dates back to the post-Civil War Reconstruction Era and was aimed at preventing former Confederates from becoming president.
Last year, Free Speech for People, an advocacy group, filed a petition in Minnesota citing the same part of the U.S. Constitution, Section 3, in an attempt to keep Trump from holding future office.
The Minnesota Supreme Court dismissed the challenge last month, saying courts and election officials did not have the authority to keep Trump off a primary ballot. But the Minnesota Supreme Court did not rule on the merits of the case.
A lower court in Michigan has also dismissed a similar suit. But the Colorado court’s decision has prompted an effort in Michigan to appeal that ruling.
However, the conservative bent of the U.S. Supreme Court, which includes three Trump-appointed justices, may very well overturn the Colorado court’s ruling.
AIPAC releases Facebook ads targeting McCollum, Omar
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) put Reps. Betty McCollum, D-4th District, and Ilhan Omar, D-5th District, in their sights this week with a Facebook ad that accused the lawmakers of “giving Hamas a lifeline” for pressing for a regional ceasefire in the Middle East.
The ads urged people to tell the Minnesota lawmakers “no truce with terrorists, no ceasefire with Hamas.”
McCollum has feuded for years with AIPAC because of her push for human rights for Palestinians and has called the pro-Israel organization a “hate group.” She responded this week with outrage at the new assault.
“Through paid Facebook attack ads against me and others who have called for a negotiated regional ceasefire to protect human lives, they are dangerously inciting hate and division to silence dissent by spreading lies and misinformation while Israel and Hamas are at war,” McCollum said in a statement. “This only further endangers innocent lives – not only in Gaza, but also in Israel.”
McCollum also said, “I have strongly condemned Hamas and continue to do so for their horrific and vicious terrorist attacks and murder of innocent Israeli citizens on October 7th. I have called for the release of all hostages. I have consistently stated that Israel has the right to self-defense. But facts don’t matter to AIPAC and its extremist supporters.”
The ads target other progressive lawmakers, too, mainly members of the “Squad.” AIPAC is also running ads praising those who are supportive of its stance regarding Israel.
“We are running ads highlighting members of Congress who have supported President Biden’s pro-Israel policies and are also running ads highlighting members who support an immediate ceasefire that would allow Hamas to stay armed and in power in Gaza,” said AIPAC spokesperson Marshall Wittman.
McCollum and Omar have been subjected to AIPAC Facebook attack ads before. For instance, the group released an ad in 2021 in which Omar’s face was superimposed onto Hamas rockets. The ad said, “When Israel targets Hamas, Rep. Omar calls it an act of terrorism.”
The ad distorted an Omar tweet that said Israeli airstrikes that killed civilians in Gaza (not Hamas) were acts of terrorism.
AIPAC refused to remove that ad, even after her aides told the group it subjected Omar to death threats.
A year earlier, AIPAC ran a Facebook ad that featured photos of McCollum, Omar and Palestinian-American Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Michigan, that said, “The radicals in the Democratic Party are pushing their anti-Semitic and anti-Israel policies down the throats of the American people.”
Its latest campaign may be an indication that AIPAC is concerned that a growing number of Democratic lawmakers are supportive of a ceasefire.
Your questions and comments
A reader wrote the following regarding a story about the extreme gridlock and unproductiveness of this Congress:
“You wrote this opening year of this Congress was the most unproductive in passing legislation that became law since the Great Depression. Why was that Congress during the Great Depression so unproductive?”
The 72nd Congress passed 21 bills that were signed into law by President Herbert Hoover in the beginning of that Congress in March 1931. But lawmakers did not convene again until the end of the year. So, the lack of much legislative activity was due to the short time that Congress was in session.
Approval of the 20th Amendment set a new congressional calendar, requiring Congress to convene in January.
Another reader sent the following comment on a story about the opposition of Minnesota’s GOP lawmakers to President Biden’s plan to reduce tailpipe emissions, a plan that would promote the production of electric vehicles:
“Is it legal to throw your trash out your car window? No, because it harms others and the environment. Well, polluting the environment with climate changing carbon dioxide emissions because you want to drive very large carbon belching SUVs and trucks is no different. At one point, we did not have the technology to make the conversion. Now we do. In the hottest December in Minnesota ever and the hottest year globally in record history, with temperatures increasing faster than projected, Republicans need to be called out for the harm they are doing because they are taking symbolic votes to help pacify their sleep-walking base.”
Please keep your comments, and any questions, coming. I’ll try my best to respond. Please contact me at aradelat@minnpost.com.
0 Commentaires