The Lawfare Podcast

Unpacking the Supreme Court’s Fourteenth Amendment Ruling

Mar 11, 2024

The podcast discusses the Supreme Court's ruling on disqualifying Trump under the Fourteenth Amendment, leaving many questions unanswered. Experts analyze the implications, internal dynamics of the ruling, historical context, and challenges of enforcing Section Three. They also touch on protecting personal information online and the complexities of election law.

49:09

Creator website

Episode guests

Roger Parloff

Ned Foley

Gerard Magliocca

AI Summary

AI Chapters

Episode notes

Podcast summary created with Snipd AI

Quick takeaways

The Supreme Court's ruling in Trump v. Anderson clarified that states cannot disqualify a former officeholder like Donald Trump from the presidential ballot for engaging in insurrection, highlighting the importance of congressional legislation for enforcement of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

The court's decision underscored the need for congressional action to effectively apply Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to federal officials, raising concerns about the potential challenges and ambiguities that may arise in future enforcement actions.

Deep dives

The Supreme Court's Ruling on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment

The Supreme Court's ruling in Trump v. Anderson on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment held that states cannot disqualify a former officeholder like Donald Trump from the presidential ballot for engaging in insurrection. This ruling leaves questions unsettled and may lead to chaos in the future. To enforce Section 3 against federal officials, the court suggested the need for congressional legislation and highlighted the critical role of Section 5 of the 14th Amendment.

Introduction

2min

Implications of Supreme Court's Ruling on Trump Disqualification

7min

Analyzing the Dynamics of Supreme Court Opinions

10min

Comparing a Historical Circuit Decision with a Recent Supreme Court Ruling on the Fourteenth Amendment

3min

Protecting Personal Information Online

6min

The Implications of Enforcing Section Three of the 14th Amendment

27min

Analyzing an Opinion, Election Law, and Discussion Wrap-up

3min

On March 4, the Supreme Court ruled in Trump v. Anderson, holding that states cannot disqualify Donald Trump from appearing on the presidential ballot under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment. Section 3 bars former officeholders who have since engaged in insurrection from taking future public office—and in recent months, a slew of lawsuits from voters and advocacy groups have pointed to the provision in seeking to strike Trump from the ballot in various states for his conduct on Jan. 6. The Court’s judgment rules out that possibility—but leaves a surprising amount of questions unsettled, in a way that may queue up chaos in the coming months.

To make sense of the Court’s ruling, Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic spoke with fellow Senior Editor Roger Parloff, who has been closely watching the Section 3 cases; Ned Foley, an expert in election law at The Ohio State University; and Gerard Magliocca of Indiana University, who has been studying Section 3 since before it was cool.

Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.