* * *
 |
| He will try to use this to his advantage, claiming that it proves the 'deep state' is out to get him. |
But hold on a
second! While Sec. 3 of the Constitution’s
14th Amendment specifically mentions Senators, Representatives, and other
office holders, it does not specifically mention the office of the President.
Recognizing
that, the Colorado court held, however, that the amendment applied to the
President because his ‘personal actions’ amounted to his engaging in an
'insurrection' and that sufficed to take him off of the ballot, even though he
was not specifically in violation of Sec. 3 of the 14th Amendment, his office
not being included in the broad array of office holders it does mention who
lose the right to hold office if they were involved in insurrection against the
government or the Constitution.
While it takes a
really stupid person to claim, in view of all the evidence presented, that
Trump did not incite the January 6 insurrection, I can see the three members of
the Supreme Court appointed by him plus Justices Thomas and Alito (that makes
it a majority) voting to overturn the Colorado decision in the absence of any
specific mention of the Presidency in the Amendment. This would follow their ‘originalist’ approach
to the Constitution’s language, not reading into it what it doesn’t
specifically say.
Three other
justices will say it does indeed apply to him, and Chief Justice Roberts will probably
join with an opinion of his own. Some
might say the timing of these opinions ought to be separable from the political
environment in which we now exist, but that environment should not be ignored
by the SCOTUS either.
I suspect that
while Roberts will vote along with the five Justices overruling the Colorado
decision, he will write a separate fence-straddling opinion that not quite, but
almost, goes along with the Colorado decision that said Trump's personal
actions amounted to his engaging in an 'insurrection' anyway although his
office was not specifically mentioned in Sec. 3 of the 14th Amendment's
language. Roberts is probably staying up nights trying to figure out how to
phrase it.
Add to this the
pending request by Department of Justice prosecutor Jack Smith that the SCOTUS
rule quickly, because of the forthcoming 2024 election, as to any presidential immunity
that Trump might have against charges based on his behavior in connection with
the January 6, 2021 insurrection. To use
a word I mentioned in a posting on here a few days ago, this is a real
'clusterfuck' and the Supreme Court is right in the middle of it.
JL
* * *
The Role of Diplomats
In the overall Israeli-Palestinian dispute, of which the war in Gaza is part, it is the role of diplomats to rein in the extremists on both sides. Once that is done, the war will end and there will be a chance for peace.
Excluding the
extremists, most reasonable people seem to agree that there must be a two-state
solution, with an independent Palestinian state accompanying the State of
Israel in what was until 1947 the British-administered ‘mandate’ of Palestine,
formerly part of the Ottoman empire dismembered after the First World War. The United Nations produced a map at that
time, more or less defining the borders of each state, with Jerusalem, still a
problem today, being internationalized. Getting there is the problem.
 |
| Original 1947 Partition Map |
Diplomats must get those who
desire a Palestinian state, be they in Gaza or in territories lost to Israel in
the abortive wars against it, to acknowledge the permanent existence of the
State of Israel, renouncing any attempt to eliminate it. And they must do so in a manner that
convinces Israel of their honest intent, removing the necessity for Israel to
guarantee Palestinian sincerity with the threat of military action, as they
have been forced to carry out in Gaza. I
don’t know how diplomacy can accomplish this, but it must.
These diplomats must also get Israel to renounce any desire for territorial expansion beyond its borders despite the failure of the Arabs in Palestine and in neighboring countries to accept the UN’s partition of the ‘mandate.’ This would mean the discontinuance of Israeli settlements in the ‘occupied territories’ outside of the borders of the State of Israel, territory lost by the Arab states supporting the Palestinians in their abortive wars against Israel and that would be part of a Palestinian state. It would also call for the gradual, scheduled, removal of such existing settlements. I also do not know how diplomacy can accomplish this, but it must.
Right now, extremists on both sides will not agree to any of this. I suspect, however, that eventually such ideas would be acceptable to the majority of Israelis and Palestinians, despite opposition by Israelis living in ‘settlements’ and Palestinians who never did and still do not accept partition, and are now living elsewhere as refugees or their descendants.
Unquestionably, these extreme changes
in philosophy on both sides are preferable to the bloodshed that is proving to
be a part of any ‘single-state’ solution.
Both Jews and Muslims should look to a bit of theology from another
religion that preaches that ‘blessed are the
peacemakers.’ And of course, diplomats
are today’s peacemakers.
JL
* * *
Housekeeping on
Jackspotpourri
Email Alerts: If you are NOT receiving emails from me alerting you each time there is a new posting on Jackspotpourri, just send me your email address and we’ll see that you do. And if you are forwarding a posting to someone, you might suggest that they do the same, so they will be similarly alerted. You can pass those email addresses to me by email at jacklippman18@gmail.com.
Forwarding Postings: Please forward this posting to anyone you think might benefit from reading it. Friends, relatives, enemies, etc.
If you want to send someone the blog, exactly as you are now seeing it, with all of its bells and whistles, you can just tell folks to check it out by visiting https://jackspotpourri.blogspot.com or by providing a link to that address in your email to them. I think this is the best method of forwarding Jackspotpourri.
There’s another, perhaps easier,
method of forwarding it though! Google Blogspot, the platform
on which Jackspotpourri is prepared, makes that possible. If you click on
the tiny envelope with the arrow at the bottom of every posting, you will
have the opportunity to list up to ten email addresses to which that blog
posting will be forwarded, along with a comment from you. Each
will receive a link to the textual portion only of the blog that
you are now reading, but without the illustrations,
colors, variations in typography, or the 'sidebar' features such as access to
the blog's archives.
Either way will work, sending
them the link to https://jackspotpourri.blogspot.com, or
clicking on the envelope at the bottom of this posting, but I
recommend sending them the link.
Again, I urge you to forward
this posting to anyone you think might benefit from reading it.
JL
* * *
No comments:
Post a Comment