A newly introduced constitutional amendment that would allow President Donald Trump to be elected to a third term in the White House faces very long odds — at best — of getting approved, a Harvard Law School professor said Friday.
The professor, Stephen Sachs, said the math and politics of such a proposal are almost certain to doom it.
Rep. Andy Ogles, a Tennessee Republican, on Thursday introduced a House resolution calling for the change to the U.S. Constitution, whose 22nd Amendment currently limits presidents to two elected terms.
Ogles’ proposed tweak was tailor-made for his fellow Republican Trump because it would allow presidents to be elected for a third term only if their first two terms were nonconsecutive.
Trump is the only currently living president to have been elected to nonconsecutive terms.
Despite the high constitutional bar to being elected to a third term, Trump has hinted about potentially seeking one….
Sachs told CNBC it is “very hard” to pass any amendment to the Constitution.
“Under Article V of the Constitution, both the House and the Senate have to approve an amendment proposal by a two-thirds vote,” Sachs noted….
It is “impossibly difficult, assuming that it would receive no or very few Democratic votes, either in Congress or in the state legislatures,” Sachs said.
“As of today, there are only 218 Republican representatives, 53 Republican senators and 28 Republican-controlled state legislatures,” Sachs said.
Ogles’ proposal has “attracted a great deal more attention than is warranted by its chances of passage,” Sachs said….
“Louisiana argues parts of Voting Rights Act are unconstitutional in redistricting case”
When I heard the news of the DOJ backing away from its position in the Callais redistricting case out of Louisiana before the Supreme Court, I realized that I had failed to link to this important story from Jan. 7 in the Louisiana Illuminator about Louisiana’s litigation position in another Voting Rights Act case:
Attorneys representing Louisiana in a lawsuit against the state legislative redistricting plans passed in 2022 are arguing that a key piece of the Voting Rights Act is unconstitutional and should not be applied to the state.
The case could produce a bellwether decision that impacts Black voting strength in several states where similar challenges have arisen.
Arguments were presented Tuesday to a three-judge panel of the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in the case Nairne v. Landry, in which Black voters are challenging the most recent legislative redistricting maps as unconstitutional racial gerrymanders. …
Every case brought under Section 2 is likely to be used as a test case for those that seek to have that portion of the Voting Rights Act overturned, advocates have said.
The U.S. Department of Justice intervened in Nairne in response to the state’s arguments against Section 2 but remained neutral on the other aspects of the case.
Noah Bokat-Lindell, a DOJ civil rights attorney, argued states cannot get a carveout from a generally applicable statute. For example, they cannot become exempt from the Americans with Disabilities Act because a state argues it doesn’t discriminate against disabled people, he said.
In a press conference after the hearing, Attorney General Liz Murrill argued that if Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act was ruled unconstitutional, Black voters could still count on the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
“Those are legal arguments that we wanted to preserve so that they eventually might make it up to the United States Supreme Court,” Murrill said. “They’ve also been percolating in a number of other cases related to the scope and continuing application of Section 2 to states under current conditions.”
Let’s watch what Trump’s DOJ does in this 5th Circuit case.
“Trump Seeks Pause of Supreme Court Cases, Disavows DOJ Stance on Voting Rights Act “
Jimmy Hoover for the NLJ:
In Louisiana v. Callais, the Supreme Court will soon hear appeals to uphold the remedial map by an unlikely alliance of the state of Louisiana and the NAACP Louisiana State Conference and other supporters of the new map, codified as S.B. 8.
In a December brief, the Biden DOJ urged the Supreme Court to “vacate”the lower court’s ruling in light of its “failure to apply the proper” legal framework for racial gerrymandering cases. Former U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar had even sought argument time for her office when the case is heard by the court.
On Friday, however, Harris—a former Williams & Connolly partner—advised the court that she was rescinding the DOJ’s position in the case.
Following the change in Administration, the Department of Justice hasreconsidered the government’s position in these cases,” she wrote.
“The purpose of this letter is to notify the Court that the previously filed brief no longer represents the position of the United States,” Harris added. “In addition, the United States is withdrawing its pending motion to participate in the oral argument.”…
Scholars of Democratic Backsliding File Amicus Brief in 4th Circuit Warning About Judge Griffin’s Attempt to Overturn the Results of the 2024 North Carolina Supreme Court Election
From the introduction to this brief:
Democracies do not necessarily live forever. Sometimes, they die. Amici’s scholarship shows that they often erode from within, through the degradation of free and fair elections and the capture of independent courts or electoral commissions by ruling parties seeking to expand and entrench their own power. Over the last 20 years, political scientists have documented and analyzed these patterns of democratic backsliding in countries like Hungary, Turkey, and Venezuela. The process is typically piecemeal—so gradual that it may not “set off society’s alarm bells.” Steven Levitsky & Daniel Ziblatt, How Democracies Die 6 (2018).
Such backsliding is happening now in North Carolina. And Judge Griffin’s effort, to invalidate tens of thousands of votes retroactively and overturn an election in the absence of any evidence of fraud or impropriety, is a dramatic escalation.
If we saw this happening in another country, we would know what to call it.
This is no ordinary legal dispute. Alarm bells should be ringing. From the perspective of political scientists and scholars whostudy the breakdown of democracy, Judge Griffin’s actions represent a profound challenge: Will an American state break with democratic norms and overturn an election decided by a majority of voters? Or will Judge Griffin’s efforts be rejected, despite the ruling party’s wishes?
One thing that separates North Carolina from Hungary or Venezuela is the ability of federal courts to enforce democratic norms embodied in federal law. Most nations do not have the benefit of an independent, politically insulated, supervening judicial authority with a duty to effectuate fundamental democratic commitments. But North Carolina has that, in the form of this Court. This Court should assert jurisdiction here, to enforce the statutory and constitutional rules that prohibit retroactively invalidating thousands of votes and to prevent further degradation of democracy in North Carolina.
Update: Griffin opposes the filing of this brief on timing grounds.
Trump Floats Disgusting Idea of Tying Disaster Aid for Los Angeles Wild Fires to California Adopting a Strict Form of Voter Identification
This one really hits home. I have friends and family who have lost their homes or otherwise been displaced by the awful recent wildfires. The tradition has been to give disaster aid where it is needed —whether that is Florida, North Carolina, or California—without extortion. What crass political opportunism.
A Texas congressman is already on board.
“Many Jan. 6 Rioters Pardoned by Trump Attacked Police, Videos Show”
After Daniel Rodriguez pleaded guilty to assaulting a police officer during the attack on the Capitol by a pro-Trump mob on Jan. 6, 2021, he was sentenced to more than 12 years in prison by a federal judge who called him a “one-man army of hate.”
Two other men, Albuquerque Cosper Head and Kyle J. Young, were sentenced to more than seven years for their parts in the assault on the officer, Michael Fanone.
On Monday, President Trump pardoned all three of them, lumping them together with nearly 1,600 other people who had been charged in connection with the Jan. 6 riot and who he suggested had been victimized by a politicized prosecution. His grant of clemency comes despite a wealth of evidence about their crimes, including videos used against them by the Justice Department.
Some of the videos document the gruesome moment when Officer Fanone, who rushed to defend the Capitol on his day off, was dragged into the crowd by Mr. Head, beaten by Mr. Young and then attacked with a stun gun by Mr. Rodriguez.
Video from Officer Fanone’s body camera shows Mr. Rodriguez driving the stun gun into Officer Fanone’s neck, causing him to scream. Officer Fanone, who has since left the police force, sustained grievous injuries that day and suffered a heart attack.
Even some close allies of Mr. Trump had opposed granting clemency to those rioters found guilty of violent crimes, especially the more than 600 who were convicted of assaulting or resisting police officers. Of those defendants, nearly 175 used a dangerous or deadly weapon, prosecutors say.
Four years later, the violence they committed is still shocking — and the facts of what happened are right there in the images, many of them now iconic.
Here are some of the most egregious acts of violence that took place during the Capitol attack, as seen in videos….
“Texas State Bar seeks to dismiss its lawsuit against Ken Paxton for challenging 2020 presidential election”
Texas Tribune:
The State Bar of Texas on Wednesday moved to drop its lawsuit against Attorney General Ken Paxton for his attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, extending a cascade of legal and political wins… Continue reading
“Trump’s White House Press Secretary Reveals Her Failed Campaign Spent $200K in Illicit Contributions”
NOTUS:
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt revealed in amended campaign filings on Thursday that her unsuccessful 2022 congressional campaign owes more than $300,000 in unpaid debts, with Leavitt failing to disclose for years that her campaign took in… Continue reading
“Pennsylvania Attorney General’s Office taking over voter registration fraud investigation in Lancaster County”
WGAL:
The Lancaster County District Attorney’s Office provided the following breakdown of ballots that were reviewed.
Detectives from the Lancaster County District Attorney’s Office reviewed 1,203 applications.
Applications were provided by the Lancaster County Voter Registration Office.
367 applications were… Continue reading
“The Magnet and the Merry-Go-Round; Why Ranked Choice Voting is superior to Condorcet Voting as a tool for political depolarization”
“Justice Department Orders a Halt to Civil Rights Work”
NY Times:
The Justice Department has ordered an immediate halt to all new civil rights cases or investigations — and signaled that it might back out of Biden-era agreements with police departments that engaged in discrimination or violence, according to… Continue reading
“‘The gloves are off’: Trump appears poised to cash in from his presidency in new ways”
Fredreka Schouten for CNN:
President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump released meme coins just days before he took the oath of office. A splashy pre-inaugural party was held at a property his company owns. And a Saudi-backed golf… Continue reading
“In blow to GOP, NC Supreme Court won’t fast-track lawsuit seeking to throw out 60,000 ballots” (Divided opinions suggest an ultimate possible 3-3 tie in this case)
Will Doran of WRAL:
North Carolina’s Republican-majority state Supreme Court ruled partially against the Republican candidate seeking to join its ranks, rejecting his effort to fast-track a lawsuit seeking to throw out more than 60,000 people’s 2024 ballots.
The case… Continue reading
“Blame the Supreme Court for Elon Musk’s Power in Trump Administration”
Brendan Fischer Rolling Stone commentary, with the subhead: “Elon Musk’s outsized influence with the new president is a direct result of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, which turns 15 this week.”