Despite the U.S. Supreme Court's unanimous ruling on Monday overturning Colorado's attempt to remove Donald Trump off the state ballot, Democrats are not giving up. With polls showing that Joe Biden is behind Trump in both national match-ups and battleground state surveys, they simply have no stomach for allowing democracy to take its course.
Soon after the Supreme Court's unanimous ruling dropped, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) rushed over to the friendly audience at CNN and announced to Democrats nationwide that the fight to bar Trump from the ballot is by no means over.
"I am working with a number of my colleagues—including Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and Eric Swalwell—to revive legislation that we had to set up a process by which we could determine that someone who committed insurrection is disqualified by Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment," he said. "And the House of Representatives already impeached Donald Trump for participating in insurrection by inciting it so, the house has already pronounced upon that."
Democrat Rep. Jamie Raskin immediately goes on CNN to announce he and Eric Swalwell are working to "revive legislation" to force President Trump off the ballot pic.twitter.com/QcYhBQn0JK
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) March 4, 2024
While such legislation has no chance now with Republicans controlling the House, The Atlantic reported last week that if Trump wins but Democrats regain control of the House, the new Democratic House majority could refuse to certify the results of the election.
Democrats would have to choose between confirming a winner many of them believe is ineligible and defying the will of voters who elected him. Their choice could be decisive: As their victory in a House special election in New York last week demonstrated, Democrats have a serious chance of winning a majority in Congress in November, even if Trump recaptures the presidency on the same day. If that happens, they could have the votes to prevent him from taking office.
In interviews, senior House Democrats would not commit to certifying a Trump win, saying they would do so only if the Supreme Court affirms his eligibility. But during oral arguments, liberal and conservative justices alike seemed inclined to dodge the question of his eligibility altogether and throw the decision to Congress.
Raskin had told The Atlantic that he didn't know how he'd vote in such a scenario.
As we spoke about what might happen, [Raskin] recalled the brutality of January 6. “There was blood all over the Capitol in the hypothetical you posit,” Raskin, who served on the January 6 committee with Schiff, told me….
In an amicus brief to the Supreme Court, a trio of legal scholars—Edward Foley, Benjamin Ginsberg, and Richard Hasen—warned the justices that if they did not rule on Trump’s eligibility, “it is a certainty” that members of Congress would seek to disqualify him on January 6, 2025. [...]
The scholars also warned that serious political instability and violence could ensue. That possibility was on Raskin’s mind, too. He conceded that the threat of violence could influence what Democrats do if Trump wins. But, Raskin added, it wouldn’t necessarily stop them from trying to disqualify him. “We might just decide that’s something we need to prepare for.”
It's obvious that Raskin is determined to stop Trump, and Democrats, seeing Trump's victory as almost inevitable (based on the polls), are actively working on contingencies to stop it from happening.
So don't think for a second that this is over. In a way, the battle over Trump's eligibility hasn't even started yet.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member