OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.
Former acting Attorney General for former President Donald Trump’s administration, Matthew Whitaker, has made a big prediction regarding his former boss being booted from two state ballots.
Whitaker said on Saturday he believes that the Supreme Court will rule in favor of the Republican frontrunner as it pertains to staying on the ballot in Colorado and elsewhere.
In an interview with Newsmax, he said that he believes that the “court is going to dispatch this, quite frankly, very quickly.”
“At the end of the day, we’re going to end up … right where we should be, which is the Supreme Court is going to dismiss this novel legal theory of the left as unconstitutional. And we can move forward, and Donald Trump will be on the ballot in all 50 states,” he said.
And he is not the only person who believes this, as it appears to be what many legal experts believe will happen.
In December, before the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, Ty Cobb, a former assistant U.S. attorney for the District of Maryland — who defended the Trump administration during Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s baseless investigation into alleged Trump-Russia collusion — told CNN that though he thinks Trump’s actions in challenging the 2020 election have been a “disaster” for the GOP, he believes the nation’s highest court will unanimously reverse the decision in Colorado.
“I think this case will be handled quickly,” the longtime attorney said. “I think it could be 9-0 in the Supreme Court for Trump.”
Democrats won’t want to hear that as they and groups aligned with them are primarily behind the effort to remove Trump.
Here’s a partial transcript of the segment, per Grabien:
ERIN BURNETT: “I want to go to Ty Cobb now, the former Trump White House lawyer. So, Ty, 133 pages, and then you have the three dissents, which I’m trying to work my way through here. From what you’ve seen, what do you take away?”
COBB: “So, I — the way I see this is — is that the Supreme Court has to take this. They can stay the dates in Colorado. They’ll move expeditiously. I was struck by the majority opinion and the amount of verbiage devoted to the sort of strawman arguments. You know, the real key issue in this case is, is Trump an officer of the United States in the context in which that term is used in Article 3 of the 14th Amendment.
“And in 2010, Chief Justice Roberts explained in Free Enterprise that people don’t vote for officers of the United States. Article 2, ‘officers of the United States,’ is commonly understood in the Constitution to refer to appointed officials. And to the extent that the president or the vice president are included as an officer or included within the admonitions of the Constitution, they are typically highlighted, like in the impeachment clause, which specifically says president, vice president.
“So I think this case will be handled quickly. I think it could be 9-0 in the Supreme Court for Trump.”
BURNETT: “Can I just say, Ty, that would be — I don’t ever like about who appointed whom because you like to just believe in the impartiality of justice, but nonetheless, it has become important. And as Trump is already pointing out, ‘Oh, the Colorado Supreme Court, they were all appointed by Democrats,’ okay, sure.
“It was a 4-3 ruling. They didn’t all rule against you. Supreme Court, when we often hear about how politicized it is — and I know we’re looking into the distance here, but if you’re looking at 9-0, that would sure be a statement.”
COBB: “Yeah. So, I do believe it could be 9-0 because the law is therein. And as you’ll recall, I was once an advocate of this position, and there have been multiple law review articles, the most prominent by Bill Boyd and his colleague. I was on a panel with Professor Boyd at the University of Chicago Institute of Politics discussing this, and I heard his views and his scholarship is excellent.”
