Watch as MeidasTouch host and law professor Ben Meiselas gives the most comprehensive analysis yet on the 14th Amendment Section 3 disqualification issues surrounding Donald Trump — posted here on Meidas+ ad-free!Meidas+ is a reader-supported publication.
For those who are confused by the Supreme Court’s decision, you should be. The majority decision ignores the plain language of the 14th Amendment Section 3. Please watch the full video. I go over the opinion of not just the majority but also by Justice Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson (Democratic appointees) who agree with me and probably you that the Supreme Court majority got it very wrong by saying Congress needs to pass legislation to declare a disqualification. They said they were writing “in protest” of the majority opinion by the right-wing justices. You have every right to feel betrayed by the Supreme Court ruling, but I am simply trying to let you know what the majority said and why it was met by a scathing response by the remaining justices. The Supreme Court interprets the constitution and until this bad ruling is overturned, this is the precedent. Unfortunately, if you answered differently, you would get the answer wrong on my law school exam.
But, I believe Americans would like to know if there is anything else could be done here. Americans should be heard, they're the ones who are going to spend the next 4 years in hell!
I understand Ben’s explanation that private attorneys couldn’t properly file suit given the Supreme Court holding legislation is required by Congress. But I fully agree we should be discussing what could be done. His explanation doesn’t fully address the explicit language of the Constitution that the already adjudicated insurrection infirmity can only be removed by a vote of 2/3 of each house of Congress.
Since the Court held only Congress can act, why can’t the current Congress introduce a bill to remove the infirmity? Since it will likely fail to pass by the required supermajority, Trump would not be sworn in. That’s consistent with Supreme Court precedent and previous Congressional actions refusing to seat elected insurrectionists. See United Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486, 550 (1969) (distinguishing between Congress’s power to expel a member, which requires a two-thirds majority, and the power to exclude a member who is constitutionally disqualified). All relevant state constitutions have a similar provision empowering state legislatures to judge the qualifications of their members.
The U.S. House of Representatives has previously used this authority to refuse to seat Member-elect Victor L. Berger in the 66th Congress. See Cannon’s Precedents, Ch. 157, § 56. After the Civil War, the House also debated whether to seat John Rice and Alfred Waddell, who faced allegations that they violated the Disqualification Clause. Hinds’ Precedents, Ch. 14. The U.S. Senate also invoked Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment when it refused to seat Zebulon Vance, who had previously served as governor of North Carolina during the Civil War. (Courtesy CREW).
The portion of the opinion that Ben highlights, isn't even dicta, nor is it in the scope of the case before them, so it is simply can not be binding on the lower federal courts.
Also, the reliance on Griffin's case requires a criminal charge, and therefor a federal law to override state law. However it also illustrates why it would not be relevant where a case for declaration and injunction consistent with what sec 3 mandates in federal civil court. It is the Supreme Court which is bound by sec 3, even in Anderson the Majority don't dispute what sec 3 instructs the court with it's plain meaning, they avoid sec 3 completely in the context of the case.
The majority did not vote for him, they invented stop the steal for a reason, so when he didn't win rightfully his sheep would fight fight fight for him.
Supreme Court Justices are not infallible. Precident should be followed but there are times when acting outside of norms to uphold the law is necessary.
Ben, there ARE linguistic ambiguities in their opinion, particularly in THAT portion of their opinion. I think those ambiguities are intentional, because if they mean what you think they mean, then they have gone outside their Article III powers. However if alternatively, the lower court (and their colleagues) are interpreting them overly broad, then they have plausible deniability, they did made the same claim that people interpret Bruen wrong, quite recently. If you don't confront them. as a lawyer about the ambiguities, and contradictions, then you let the broadest interpretation prevail. As officers of the court, you have a responsibility to represent your clients and use EVERY TOOL IN THE BOX.
The entire legal profession makes an enormous mistake, by not confronting them wherever they are simply wrong, or ambiguous. and by treating the ruling that way on a test, as a teacher you are complicit.
It's your responsibility as a lawyer, and your student's responsibility as future lawyers, to MAKE THEM SAY THE QUIET PART OUTLOUD, and not just mumble nonsense to support their arguments
I say that with the deepest affection and esteem, but law schools have to teach lawyers to check the supreme court or nobody will do it. It's more important than being right about how they'll rule on a given case, it's (particularly now) the most important part of their job, particularly when they do pro-bono work.
I saw this yesterday. Ben reads many explanations and paragraphs that are interpreted by the Supreme Court. We all know they are biased. I believe they will say anything to get Trump into office at the expense of our democracy and country. They do not care about the law. They only care about enriching themselves. It’s sad how greed is ruining our country. I also believe that the election was interfered with. That Elon Musk played a big part in this. The election should have been investigated!! I will not give up hope that Trump can be stopped. I’m hoping that our leaders wake up and declare the 14th amendment suitable to stop Trump. There are others who are not giving up either. These people give me hope. There is still time to do whatever we can to make this happen. There are too many of us who don’t want Trump in office.
Or that we would want an investigation. And god forbid anyone mentions this!! It’s okay for Trump to declare an investigation. I’m disappointed that no one, not even any of our leaders requested this!!! Jessica Denson is the only brave person in the media who is not giving up on amendment 14, section 3. She’s had a few experts, on the constitution, on her podcast, explaining that Trump has indeed been disqualified and should absolutely be removed from office!!!!However, no one is acting on his removal!!!! This is not only unconstitutional, but it is showing how lawless our country has become. Power and money are more important. There are no more leaders!! People have become leaders not by their qualifications, but by the money they have. Allowing money in politics has destroyed our nation. It’s no more about character, honesty, morality and integrity!!! We must get rid of Citizens United!!!!! I have added my name to petitions regarding this issue. So what the hell is happening with it???????
The problem is we don’t have any more leaders in the house. No one to truly stand up for the people of this nation!!! There are too many idiots and crooks in Congress!!! We must look into peoples backgrounds when they are running for election and make sure they are the kind of leaders to help Americans!!! Research them!!!!!
I agree that Trump should have been disqualified. I think SCOTUS got it wrong.
Ben, what can we do to change SCOTUS? I can't believe there's no way to get these people off the Supreme Court. What would it take to change the constitution so we have scotus term limits or something to stop them from using their power to subvert the will of the people? Just like I believe the President shouldn't have total immunity, neither should scotus have no limits nor accountability.
Clearly our founders never thought this would happen.
If we hadn't dragged our feet and started fighting this when it happened instead of waiting until election time, i don't think we would be here now. I don't think VP Harris should certify on Jan. 6th. PERIOD!!!!
In the second impeachment Congress has decided that Trump engaged in insurrection. The house passed articles of impeachment saying clearly that Trump engaged in insurrection, and in the trial, a majority of the senate voted yes on those articles of impeachment, just not the two thirds needed to remove him immediately.
Impeachment is the bringing of charges, but unfortunately he wasn't convicted in the trial. (Thanks, Moscow Mitch!) So that's like saying someone is guilty because they were charged with a crime even though they weren't convicted. They may be as guilty as sin but under the law they are not. God, after three of them in 30 years, I wish people would learn how impeachment works.
You never know, there just might come a time when enough Republicans get sick and tired of dealing with Trump and his ridiculous nominees, and could be convinced to vote to have him disqualified for office. But then do we get President Vance? Or will we have enough evidence by then to prove that Musk or someone else actually did hack the ballots in those seven battleground states and will Congress and the current Justice Department arrest him (or whoever is responsible) as well? And while we’re talking about this, why isn’t Musk already being arrested under the Logan Act?
Ben. I am eager to listen to this as soon as I get the chance. Some of Dr. Bandy Lee's subscribers, including me were on a Zoom call on Sunday. Are we able to call Justice Murchan and ask him to order a neuro psych exam to assess for fitness for duty? Is that some thing ordinary citizens can do to get our voices heard or? I've called my Senator and asked for a meeting but have not heard back and thst was 1 month ago. I know you and your Medeis community all agree DJT is unfit for office. Mental pathology is rampant and Trump Contagion has taken hold. For the community here if you are not yet aware of Dr. BANDY Lee's work please check out her website and her Substack. Back in 2017 she held a meeting at Yale where she and other forensic Psychiatrists met to discuss the 'Duty to Warn' based on their ethics as Physicians. The APA shut them down due to the Goldwater Rule. Ben, I mentioned MTN to all of Dr. Lee's subscribers. I can't help but feel there is value in having her as a weekly contributor to your Network. Many I talk to are not familiar with her work. I don't know how I would be doing right now without your work, the MTN, this community and Dr. Lee's weekly newsletter and weekly Zoom call. Please, can we start a movement to prevent DJT from being sworn in to office inJanuary? TY for your consideration.
We are living in a time when words no longer mean what they mean so long as the corrupt Supreme Court decides they mean something else. Madness!
We need to flip as many seats in Congress as possible in 2026! Meanwhile we need our CURRENT Justice Department to investigate the hacking of the ballots in the seven battleground states! Prove it happened before January!
I don't think we can afford to wait that long. Think of the damage this demented man and his crew of misfits can can dispense in 2 years. I worry about the damage he can do in a couple days and Musk is extremely dangerous. He needs to be out of the picture. We didn't elect him for anything and doubt that people would.
Given that many Republicans recently voted against Trump raising the debt ceiling and shutting down the government, doesn't that at least give a glimmer of hope that some Republicans might actually support Trump's disqualification?
Nope I don’t have it backwards. Neither do you. We have it correct. The issue is that the majority in the Supreme Court ruled the opposite of what you and I believe and what the plain language is.
You have a corrupt Supreme Court so why would you allow them to overturn the original constitutional rule that stated a criminal cannot stand for office. That decision was a common sense decisions, that is if you want a fair & honest government. To change & allow a criminal shows America is happy with criminality in the highest of political power.
Too bad we can't go back in time and make sure that Biden's first Congress enacted that law. I'm sure they would have if they had had a clue that SCOTUS would come up with this nonsense.
The Corruption of Congress, Senate, DOJ, Executive branch is very complete because the Ignorant, Corrupt in MIND and Spirit, and Apathetic Americans became the majority. Our only hope for Justice and Democracy to Prevail is to Educate the Ignorant and get the democratic people to go to the polls and Vote!
this clown was disqualified the day he was born.....now he's back again creating scandals before he's even back in office, which he never ever should be....we need some good old wild west vigilante justice here....get the orange freakazoid and his 6 right wing Freakeets on the SC and run em out of town on a rail...maybe deport their sorry asses to Panama.
For those who are confused by the Supreme Court’s decision, you should be. The majority decision ignores the plain language of the 14th Amendment Section 3. Please watch the full video. I go over the opinion of not just the majority but also by Justice Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson (Democratic appointees) who agree with me and probably you that the Supreme Court majority got it very wrong by saying Congress needs to pass legislation to declare a disqualification. They said they were writing “in protest” of the majority opinion by the right-wing justices. You have every right to feel betrayed by the Supreme Court ruling, but I am simply trying to let you know what the majority said and why it was met by a scathing response by the remaining justices. The Supreme Court interprets the constitution and until this bad ruling is overturned, this is the precedent. Unfortunately, if you answered differently, you would get the answer wrong on my law school exam.
But, I believe Americans would like to know if there is anything else could be done here. Americans should be heard, they're the ones who are going to spend the next 4 years in hell!
I understand Ben’s explanation that private attorneys couldn’t properly file suit given the Supreme Court holding legislation is required by Congress. But I fully agree we should be discussing what could be done. His explanation doesn’t fully address the explicit language of the Constitution that the already adjudicated insurrection infirmity can only be removed by a vote of 2/3 of each house of Congress.
Since the Court held only Congress can act, why can’t the current Congress introduce a bill to remove the infirmity? Since it will likely fail to pass by the required supermajority, Trump would not be sworn in. That’s consistent with Supreme Court precedent and previous Congressional actions refusing to seat elected insurrectionists. See United Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486, 550 (1969) (distinguishing between Congress’s power to expel a member, which requires a two-thirds majority, and the power to exclude a member who is constitutionally disqualified). All relevant state constitutions have a similar provision empowering state legislatures to judge the qualifications of their members.
The U.S. House of Representatives has previously used this authority to refuse to seat Member-elect Victor L. Berger in the 66th Congress. See Cannon’s Precedents, Ch. 157, § 56. After the Civil War, the House also debated whether to seat John Rice and Alfred Waddell, who faced allegations that they violated the Disqualification Clause. Hinds’ Precedents, Ch. 14. The U.S. Senate also invoked Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment when it refused to seat Zebulon Vance, who had previously served as governor of North Carolina during the Civil War. (Courtesy CREW).
The portion of the opinion that Ben highlights, isn't even dicta, nor is it in the scope of the case before them, so it is simply can not be binding on the lower federal courts.
Also, the reliance on Griffin's case requires a criminal charge, and therefor a federal law to override state law. However it also illustrates why it would not be relevant where a case for declaration and injunction consistent with what sec 3 mandates in federal civil court. It is the Supreme Court which is bound by sec 3, even in Anderson the Majority don't dispute what sec 3 instructs the court with it's plain meaning, they avoid sec 3 completely in the context of the case.
JOIN US FOR A PEACEFUL DEMONSTRATION.
https://nowmarch.org/
The majority did not vote for him, they invented stop the steal for a reason, so when he didn't win rightfully his sheep would fight fight fight for him.
Supreme Court Justices are not infallible. Precident should be followed but there are times when acting outside of norms to uphold the law is necessary.
I'm not a lawyer, and you are. But to me, acting on a corrupt precident for the sake of it is obeying in advance.
See the "separate but equal" doctrine.
So obey in advance?
Ben, there ARE linguistic ambiguities in their opinion, particularly in THAT portion of their opinion. I think those ambiguities are intentional, because if they mean what you think they mean, then they have gone outside their Article III powers. However if alternatively, the lower court (and their colleagues) are interpreting them overly broad, then they have plausible deniability, they did made the same claim that people interpret Bruen wrong, quite recently. If you don't confront them. as a lawyer about the ambiguities, and contradictions, then you let the broadest interpretation prevail. As officers of the court, you have a responsibility to represent your clients and use EVERY TOOL IN THE BOX.
The entire legal profession makes an enormous mistake, by not confronting them wherever they are simply wrong, or ambiguous. and by treating the ruling that way on a test, as a teacher you are complicit.
It's your responsibility as a lawyer, and your student's responsibility as future lawyers, to MAKE THEM SAY THE QUIET PART OUTLOUD, and not just mumble nonsense to support their arguments
so, as your student, I would deduct points from my esteem for making such a question "wrong"
you have to make them actually say "because we can do anything we want", if you presume that to be the case, you give them that power by default
I say that with the deepest affection and esteem, but law schools have to teach lawyers to check the supreme court or nobody will do it. It's more important than being right about how they'll rule on a given case, it's (particularly now) the most important part of their job, particularly when they do pro-bono work.
I saw this yesterday. Ben reads many explanations and paragraphs that are interpreted by the Supreme Court. We all know they are biased. I believe they will say anything to get Trump into office at the expense of our democracy and country. They do not care about the law. They only care about enriching themselves. It’s sad how greed is ruining our country. I also believe that the election was interfered with. That Elon Musk played a big part in this. The election should have been investigated!! I will not give up hope that Trump can be stopped. I’m hoping that our leaders wake up and declare the 14th amendment suitable to stop Trump. There are others who are not giving up either. These people give me hope. There is still time to do whatever we can to make this happen. There are too many of us who don’t want Trump in office.
I firmly believe the election was interfered with too, without a doubt.
Of course it doesn’t matter what we think!!!
Their tune would be totally the opposite, if it were by a far stretch of the imagine, that the Dems committed the exact same plan!
You bet it would because
narcissists are always right. They never accept defeat!
ONLY Republicans cheat !
Or that we would want an investigation. And god forbid anyone mentions this!! It’s okay for Trump to declare an investigation. I’m disappointed that no one, not even any of our leaders requested this!!! Jessica Denson is the only brave person in the media who is not giving up on amendment 14, section 3. She’s had a few experts, on the constitution, on her podcast, explaining that Trump has indeed been disqualified and should absolutely be removed from office!!!!However, no one is acting on his removal!!!! This is not only unconstitutional, but it is showing how lawless our country has become. Power and money are more important. There are no more leaders!! People have become leaders not by their qualifications, but by the money they have. Allowing money in politics has destroyed our nation. It’s no more about character, honesty, morality and integrity!!! We must get rid of Citizens United!!!!! I have added my name to petitions regarding this issue. So what the hell is happening with it???????
feel free to give this a read if it gives you any comfort that someone agrees that somebody needs to get off their ass and TRY:
SCOTUS DOCKET :
No. 24-617
Title: Joe Alter, Petitioner
v.
Donald J. Trump
Docketed: December 5, 2024
Lower Ct: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Case Numbers: (24-5132)
Decision Date: September 4, 2024
Rehearing Denied: October 15, 2024
Date Proceedings and Orders
Nov 20 2024 Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 6, 2025)
PetitionAppendixProof of ServiceCertificate of Word Count
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/24-617.html
The problem is we don’t have any more leaders in the house. No one to truly stand up for the people of this nation!!! There are too many idiots and crooks in Congress!!! We must look into peoples backgrounds when they are running for election and make sure they are the kind of leaders to help Americans!!! Research them!!!!!
The Supreme Court continues to pander to Trump.
I agree that Trump should have been disqualified. I think SCOTUS got it wrong.
Ben, what can we do to change SCOTUS? I can't believe there's no way to get these people off the Supreme Court. What would it take to change the constitution so we have scotus term limits or something to stop them from using their power to subvert the will of the people? Just like I believe the President shouldn't have total immunity, neither should scotus have no limits nor accountability.
Clearly our founders never thought this would happen.
If we hadn't dragged our feet and started fighting this when it happened instead of waiting until election time, i don't think we would be here now. I don't think VP Harris should certify on Jan. 6th. PERIOD!!!!
The VP's function is purely ceremonial. Congress passed another law in the past 4 years that made that even clearer than it was.
YES ABSOLUTELY!
I totally agree with you!
It ALREADY HAS HAPPENED.
In the second impeachment Congress has decided that Trump engaged in insurrection. The house passed articles of impeachment saying clearly that Trump engaged in insurrection, and in the trial, a majority of the senate voted yes on those articles of impeachment, just not the two thirds needed to remove him immediately.
Just nobody will enforce this decision.
Impeachment is the bringing of charges, but unfortunately he wasn't convicted in the trial. (Thanks, Moscow Mitch!) So that's like saying someone is guilty because they were charged with a crime even though they weren't convicted. They may be as guilty as sin but under the law they are not. God, after three of them in 30 years, I wish people would learn how impeachment works.
As I said it was not enough to remove Trump but it did fulfill the requirements the Supreme Court made for applying amendment 14,3.
Or seems that no one paid attention, otherwise Trump couldn't have been reelected.
Anyway, I'm not so sure that a president Vance would not be worse.
The Supreme Court is mentioned NOWHERE in 14A§3! It's a DEFACTO truth that can only be lifted BY 2/3 OF EACH HOUSE.
You never know, there just might come a time when enough Republicans get sick and tired of dealing with Trump and his ridiculous nominees, and could be convinced to vote to have him disqualified for office. But then do we get President Vance? Or will we have enough evidence by then to prove that Musk or someone else actually did hack the ballots in those seven battleground states and will Congress and the current Justice Department arrest him (or whoever is responsible) as well? And while we’re talking about this, why isn’t Musk already being arrested under the Logan Act?
Because he's a billionaire
Virtually no one of any party has ever been prosecuted under the Logan Act.
Ben. I am eager to listen to this as soon as I get the chance. Some of Dr. Bandy Lee's subscribers, including me were on a Zoom call on Sunday. Are we able to call Justice Murchan and ask him to order a neuro psych exam to assess for fitness for duty? Is that some thing ordinary citizens can do to get our voices heard or? I've called my Senator and asked for a meeting but have not heard back and thst was 1 month ago. I know you and your Medeis community all agree DJT is unfit for office. Mental pathology is rampant and Trump Contagion has taken hold. For the community here if you are not yet aware of Dr. BANDY Lee's work please check out her website and her Substack. Back in 2017 she held a meeting at Yale where she and other forensic Psychiatrists met to discuss the 'Duty to Warn' based on their ethics as Physicians. The APA shut them down due to the Goldwater Rule. Ben, I mentioned MTN to all of Dr. Lee's subscribers. I can't help but feel there is value in having her as a weekly contributor to your Network. Many I talk to are not familiar with her work. I don't know how I would be doing right now without your work, the MTN, this community and Dr. Lee's weekly newsletter and weekly Zoom call. Please, can we start a movement to prevent DJT from being sworn in to office inJanuary? TY for your consideration.
Did everyone see this today? https://thehill.com/opinion/congress-blog/5055171-constitution-insurrection-trump-disqualification/
We are living in a time when words no longer mean what they mean so long as the corrupt Supreme Court decides they mean something else. Madness!
We need to flip as many seats in Congress as possible in 2026! Meanwhile we need our CURRENT Justice Department to investigate the hacking of the ballots in the seven battleground states! Prove it happened before January!
I don't think we can afford to wait that long. Think of the damage this demented man and his crew of misfits can can dispense in 2 years. I worry about the damage he can do in a couple days and Musk is extremely dangerous. He needs to be out of the picture. We didn't elect him for anything and doubt that people would.
Given that many Republicans recently voted against Trump raising the debt ceiling and shutting down the government, doesn't that at least give a glimmer of hope that some Republicans might actually support Trump's disqualification?
Nope I don’t have it backwards. Neither do you. We have it correct. The issue is that the majority in the Supreme Court ruled the opposite of what you and I believe and what the plain language is.
I bet they would if it was by secret ballot.
You have a corrupt Supreme Court so why would you allow them to overturn the original constitutional rule that stated a criminal cannot stand for office. That decision was a common sense decisions, that is if you want a fair & honest government. To change & allow a criminal shows America is happy with criminality in the highest of political power.
There was a scope to the appeal to SCOTUS. Do what the Constitution REQUIRES, and make the Supreme Court reject the Constitution.
It takes an act of Congress to let trump be president not the other way around.
Too bad we can't go back in time and make sure that Biden's first Congress enacted that law. I'm sure they would have if they had had a clue that SCOTUS would come up with this nonsense.
You misunderstood. Because he is disqualified, the 14th Amendment provides he could still take office if 2/3 of Congress voted to allow it.
And care what the Supreme Court thinks, why?? They made up laws to protect Donald Trump.
The Corruption of Congress, Senate, DOJ, Executive branch is very complete because the Ignorant, Corrupt in MIND and Spirit, and Apathetic Americans became the majority. Our only hope for Justice and Democracy to Prevail is to Educate the Ignorant and get the democratic people to go to the polls and Vote!
this clown was disqualified the day he was born.....now he's back again creating scandals before he's even back in office, which he never ever should be....we need some good old wild west vigilante justice here....get the orange freakazoid and his 6 right wing Freakeets on the SC and run em out of town on a rail...maybe deport their sorry asses to Panama.