Season 4, Episode 1 (Show 158): Section Three Punditry: The Good, The Bad, and The Silly

January 3, 2024

The Section Three national debate continues unabated.  We bring you the main arguments through a selection of articles and authors, and evaluate them for you. Akhil also brings several new arguments to the table.

CLE Credit Available for this episode.

The nation awaits the Supreme Court’s seemingly inevitable review of the Section Three case from Colorado, and perhaps Maine as well.  Media around the world is weighing in with editorials and op-Ed’s; a smorgasbord of legal, political, and predictive arguments from professors, editors, elected officials, and others with their own range of expertise.  We continue our attempt to help you make sense of these by choosing pieces that make the range of arguments out there.  We do our best to present their argument and respond to it, bringing Professor Amar’s considerable armamentarium to bear for your benefit.  And this week, Akhil has at least two – maybe three – major new ideas he brings to the national discussion.  They can be found here first.

(LAWYERS AND JUDGES ARE ELIGIBLE FOR CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION CREDIT by visiting podcast.njsba.com after listening.)

Show Notes:

How to get Continuing Legal Education Credit for listening!

Virtually all lawyers and judges admitted to practice anywhere in the USA can obtain CLE (Continuing Legal Education) credit after listening to this episode by visiting podcast.njsba.com.  You do not have to be a New Jersey lawyer or resident or admitted to the NJ Bar; essentially every state has reciprocity arrangements with New Jersey.  When you visit the site you fill out a form and provide the code Andy read during the episode, pay a small fee, and within two weeks you will receive the certificate from New Jersey.  It couldn’t be easier.  Thanks to the New Jersey Bar Association for making this possible!  Note, too, that other podcast episodes from our “back catalog” now qualify for this credit as well.  See notes below on this.

Click to go to the website for CLE credit

Colorado’s Top Court Kicked Trump Off the Ballot. Will the Supreme Court Agree - The New Yorker

Election law expert Professor Richard Pildes is interviewed in The New Yorker, in an article we consider carefully for the many questions/arguments it lays out.  A good portrayal of the landscape.

Read and/or Download

The Supreme Court Should Overturn the Colorado Ruling Unanimously - The New York Times

Samuel Moyn writes in the New York Times with a view towards the consequences of possible Section Three rulings.

Read and/or Download

The Supreme Court should toss the Colorado case - The Washington Post

Ruth Marcus’ op-ed in the Washington Post analyzes the Colorado case, especially some of the arguments in the dissents.

Read and/or Download

The 14th Amendment Disqualification Was Not Meant for Trump - The New York Times

Kurt Lash writes in the New York Times about supposed ambiguity in Section Three.  We analyze these claims at length, including such notions as “there wasn’t a person in the Senate or House who worried about loyal Americans electing a former rebel like Jefferson Davis as president,” but at the same time, “Congressional Republicans were so concerned about mischief in the Electoral College that they delayed the passage of the 14th Amendment in order to make sure the issue was properly addressed.”

Read and/or Download