Bonus 65: Five Things I'm Listening For in Today's Section 3 ArgumentIn advance of this morning's oral argument on whether former President Trump is disqualified from future federal office, some thoughts on what I'll be listening for
Welcome back to the weekly bonus content for “One First,” and a special welcome to new subscribers!! Although Monday’s regular newsletter will remain free for as long as I’m able to do this (like this Monday’s discussion of Lincoln, Taney, and the suspension of habeas corpus), much of the bonus content is behind a paywall as an added incentive for those who are willing and able to support the work that goes into putting this newsletter together every week. I’m grateful to those of you who are already paid subscribers, and hope that those of you who aren’t will consider a paid subscription if and when your circumstances permit: The topic for this week’s bonus content is an obvious one. Even with Tuesday’s unanimous ruling by the D.C. Circuit that former President Trump is not immune from criminal prosecution for his role in the events leading up to (and on) January 6, 2021, about which I’ll have much more to say on Monday, today’s oral argument in the ballot disqualification case clearly takes precedence. I don’t think it’s an overstatement to suggest that this is one of the biggest cases that the Court has heard in decades—and possibly the most politically significant argument since Bush v. Gore in December 2000. As I wrote back in December, I think that this case poses myriad legal and political challenges for the justices (some of their own making), even if you think (as I do) that Trump did “engage in” insurrection. Rather than rehash that analysis, I thought I’d use today’s issue as something of a “what to listen for” guide for those who are planning to live-stream the argument, which should begin sometime around 10:10 ET (the Court is set to hand down one or more opinions in argued cases, which will not be live-streamed because … reasons, before it turns to the main event). For those who are not paid subscribers, the next free installment of the newsletter will drop on Monday morning. For those who are, please read on. Before turning to specifics, an obligatory caveat: Oral arguments are not necessarily an accurate predictor of how the Supreme Court is going to rule. In my experience, the more visible/high-profile a case is, the less one can be confident, based upon how the argument goes, in how the justices are leaning. That’s only the more so when you have a case, like this one, in which the justices are confronting so many questions of first impression—and where there’s a lot more going on than just fighting over the applicability of particular precedents. Is it possible that it will be abundantly clear, based on how the argument goes, what the Court is likely to do? Sure. But it is by no means a given. So please take what follows (and what reporters and other commentators say during and after the argument) with at least a couple of grains of salt.
Of course, a lot can happen during an 80-minute oral argument (that, if I had to bet, will go at least 2.5 hours).¹ In my capacity as CNN Supreme Court analyst, I’ll be helping with live coverage both on the network and online. So I’ll try to offer additional thoughts there. But hopefully the above helps to set the stage for what could very well be an illuminating oral argument—even if it’s not as revealing as we might want it to be (and especially if it is). We’ll be back Monday with our regular coverage of the Court. Until then, thanks for reading; I hope you have a great weekend! 1 Since COVID (and the shifts in the Court’s argument protocol that it precipitated), the Court has regularly gone well over the allotted argument time, especially in higher-profile cases. This is a noted contrast from as recently as the tenure of Chief Justice Rehnquist, who was notorious for cutting counsel off as soon as the red light signaling the end of their argument time came on. Perhaps the thing that I’m most confident about heading into the argument today is that this trend will continue. © 2024 Steve Vladeck |