Ramaswamy Warns Liberal Justices of ‘Buying Political Latitude’ with 9-0 Ruling Amid More Trump Cases Ahead


Ramaswamy analyzes the subtleties of the liberal justices’ concurrence, even though the decision was 9-0.

Ramaswamy warns liberal justices they have ‘bought leashes’ after 9-0 rulings in Trump cases

Vivek RAMASWAMY, former GOP Presidential candidate, warned the three liberal Justices that they could turn against former President Trump at any time.

Vivek Ramaswamy a former Republican candidate for president praised the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision to remove former President Trump from Colorado’s ballot in 2024. He warned against any possible foreshadowing in the written decision.

Ramaswamy echoed Trump after the decision had been made that this was a “case for national unification” and that the United States couldn’t be united if a “patchwork of states” were able to make unilateral decisions about a national candidate’s eligibility outside the usual age laws and tenure laws.

“That will not work for a country. “That is the real issue here,” he said. It’s all about the future. “The Supreme Court, in a decision of 9-0, ruled that the correct answer was to this question.

Ramaswamy said that the subtext in the concurrence written by Ketanji Jackson and Ketanji Brown and Obama’s Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, Ketanji and Ketanji was that the bench had “bought themselves some political leeway” to say there would be other Trump-related lawsuits that came to the Supreme Court at this time. ”

Members of the Supreme Court, from left, Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Neil M. Gorsuch, Sonia Sotomayor, and Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., and Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson, Samuel A. Alito, Jr., Elena Kagan, and Brett M. Kavanaugh.

He said: “You can see that the liberal justices have voted unanimously in favor of the ruling 9-0. But they also state that other federal actors including those outside Congress would have been able to exercise this power. ”

He told “Hannity”, “I think they are buying some leash if they go in a different direction in the other cases.”

Trump could find himself in front of the Supreme Court, which will decide whether he is immune from allegations that date back to January 6, 2020. This includes those made by Special Counsel Jack Smith.

News outlets including the New Yorker also reported an upcoming case involving now-former North Cornwall, Pa. police officer Joseph Fischer regarding the filing of his obstructing-an-official-proceeding charge during the Capitol riot could also affect Trump’s charges from Smith.

Sean Hannity: Supreme Court protects the integrity of primary electionsVideo

Ramaswamy said that the John Roberts Court focused on the public perception of the “institutional legitimacy” and the unanimous 9-0 decision on Monday is “an outstanding result.”

He said that the agreement of the liberal judges “planted seeds” to allow future cases to be decided differently.

The three liberals argued that the majority court “went] above [the] necessity of this case to limit how Section III [of the [Fourteenth Amendment]] could prevent an insurrectionist, who has broken his oath, from becoming president.”

Jackson Sotomayor and Kagan protested against the majority’s attempts to use the case to define the limits of federal enforcement.

Ramaswamy thinks that efforts to remove Trump’s name from the ballot will have negative long-term consequences for the United States.

He said: “[It] can undo what was started in 1776, a monarchy and not a democracy where an autocrat decides who the people elect or who they don’t.”