Connect with us

Features

Spotlight on SCOTUS: Trump and the Political System on Trial in the US

Published

on

US Supreme Court Justices: Front row, left to right: Sonia Sotomayor, Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., Samuel A. Alito, Jr., and Elena Kagan. Back row, left to right: Amy Coney Barrett, Neil M. Gorsuch, Brett M. Kavanaugh, and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

by Rajan Philips

SCOTUS, the Supreme Court of the United States, is the most common coinage that is currently in political circulation in the US. On Thursday the Court heard oral arguments in the Colorado case, Trump v. Anderson. The case involves Donald Trump’s appeal of the Colorado Supreme Court ruling disqualifying him from being a candidate in the State of Colorado for the US Presidential election on account of his involvement as instigator in the 2021 January 6 insurrection at the US Capitol in Washington, to prevent the ratification of the (November 2020) election of Joe Biden as President by the US Congress.

Come Monday, the Court will have to deal with another Trump appeal – against the February 6 ruling of the United States Court of Appeal for the District of Columbia Circuit, rejecting Trump’s claim of absolute immunity for ever from criminal prosecution for actions during his time as President.

The Appeal Court’s ruling dismissed Trump’s interlocutory appeal against his four-count Indictment in the Washington District Court on account of his actions challenging the 2020 election results and interfering with the process of certification of the results by the US Congress on January 6, 2021.

An American Labyrinth

To be clear, the case in Colorado was brought by a group of Republican voters led by Norma Anderson, a 91-year old former Republican State Legislator. The group was seeking to stop the Colorado Secretary of State from placing the name of Donald Trump on the ballot for the State’s Republican presidential primary election for nomination of the Republican candidate for the presidential election in November. The group claimed that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution disqualified the former President from seeking the presidency in 2024, because he had engaged in insurrection on 2021 January 6, after swearing an oath as President to support the US Constitution.

The 14th Amendment to the Constitution, adopted in July 1868, is a product of the post-Civil War era, and Section 1 of the Amendment is one of the most consequential and litigated provisions of the US Constitution. Its many clauses have been used to extend civil liberties to African Americans, enable abortion and gay rights, and enforce equal protection and due process requirements.

The Amendment also includes one of the most dormant parts of the constitution, i.e., Section 3, which forbids former office holders, who violate their oath of office to support the constitution by participating in an insurrection or rebellion, from holding office again.

Its historical purpose was to prevent former confederates from becoming elected or appointed officials in the federal and state governments after the Civil War. There has only been one judicial pronouncement on Section 3 soon after the adoption of the 14th Amendment, and only one instance of its application to disqualify a person in election.

That was in 1919, when Section 3 was invoked to prevent Victor Berger, an Austrian American and a founding member of the Socialist Party of America, from assuming his seat in the US Congress after winning elections twice, in 1919 and 1920, from a district in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

Berger had been previously elected twice and served as a Congressman, becoming the first Socialist to enter the US Congress in 1910. His later disqualification arose on account of being convicted under the Espionage Act for anti-war writings during World War 1. His expulsion was overturned by the US Supreme Court and Berger went on to serve as a Congressman for three terms after winning three elections in the 1920s.

Almost a 100 years later, Section 3 has been invoked in Colorado to challenge Donald Trump’s qualification as a presidential candidate. Trump is palpably more disqualified than Victor Berger ever was, but the legal opinion on the matter is strongly divided. And those who disagree with the disqualification school are more concerned about the practicality of enforcing it and they would seem to prefer the easier alternative of leaving it to the voters to have the final say.

That apparently is the democratic way. But that would be treating Donald Trump differently, and perhaps deferentially, from others. Needless to say, many Democrats, including Democratic States, such as California, disagree with the approach taken by Colorado, even the action in Colorado was triggered by Republican voters.

Unlike the Colorado case, the case against Trump in the Washington District Court has been brought by independent Special Counsel Jack Smith appointed by the US Justice Department. Remarkably, the Washington case that indicts Trump on four counts for his actions challenging the 2020 election results and for interfering with the process of their certification by Congress, makes no mention of insurrection or Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

It is a straightforward criminal case and Trump’s challenge of the indictment is on the grounds of presidential immunity. The District Court rejected his challenge, and the Federal Court of Appeal has now endorsed the lower court’s rejection. Trump has been given till Monday to appeal this ruling to US Supreme Court.

Looking for an Off-Ramp

Pundits and court watchers are predicting SCOTUS to overrule the Colorado decision, that would enable Trump to be a presidential candidate in November this year. For a third time in a row, a first after Franklin Roosevelt during World War II. The Court is equally expected to uphold the Federal Appeal Court ruling rejecting Trump’s immunity claim, potentially without even a hearing. Even a rare unanimity among the judges is expected in both cases.

In the Colorado case, the Court is expected to rule against the State for practical reasons, sidestepping the grounds Trump’s appeal is based on. In the immunity case, the judges are expected to quietly endorse the ruling of the Appeal Court which has been widely praised as a judicial tour de force in constitutional rulings.

In effect, the two SCOTUS decisions would leave Trump continuing as a candidate with his legal jeopardy continuing alongside. In the best case scenario for the American political system, Trump will be defeated in the November election and that should end the phenomenon of Trumpism in American politics, but not necessarily the end of the forces in American society and their grievances against American elitism and establishment that Trump has been able to mobilize and sustain through three US election cycles.

In the worst case scenario, Trump will win the election and all chaos will break loose. But it will not be the end of the world for America, and there could be a new America at the end of four years if a second Trump presidency were to last a full term surviving its own endemic chaos.

Without question, there would be irreparable setbacks and irreversible changes, mostly on the external front. America will be isolated from the outside, and it would be a wholly different isolationist experience from the internally inspired desire for isolationism that is part of the American political tradition.

Trump doesn’t belong to that tradition or, for that matter, to any positive tradition in the country. The worst case scenario for America could also be the best case scenario for Benjamin Netanyahu in Israel, if he were to last that long in office; and to a lesser extent for Vladimir Putin in Russia, who would likely outlast all his western detractors.

It is fair to assume that all of the nine Supreme Court judges would be hoping the November election would see the defeat of Trump and create the best case scenario for their county. That includes not only the liberal leaning, Democratic appointees on the Court (Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kegan, both appointed by President Obama; and Ketanji Brown Jackson, appointed by President Biden), but also the two archetypal conservatives (Clarence Thomas, appointed by President George HW Bush; and Samuel Alito, appointed by President George W Bush); the three Trump appointees (Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett); not to mention the beleaguered Chief Justice of the ideologically divided Court, John Roberts, appointed by President George W. Bush.

That all of them are leaning towards dismissing the Colorado is the inference of almost all pundits and commentators after listening to oral submissions by lawyers appearing for Trump and the Colorado petitioners and the tones and lines of questioning by Justices. Some of the sharpest questions came from two liberal Justices, Elena Kegan and Ketanji Brown Jackson – the newest Justice on the Court and appointed by President Biden.

Justice Kagan is considered to have hinted at a potential ‘off-ramp’ on which all the justices could agree. And that involves what Justice Kagan called the “broader principle” of state and federal powers.

She contended that while “states have great power over many different areas” in the American federal system, “there are certain national questions where states are not the repository of authority,” and one of them could be the election of a president. The same point was made by the Chief Justice that allowing one state to disqualify a (Republican) presidential candidate now could have the effect of enabling other states to disqualify a Democratic presidential candidate in a partisan tit for tat in the future.

For all justices, the practicality of the remedy seemed to outweigh the legal question involving Trump’s candidacy in terms of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. And the Justices’ questioning seemed to indicate any illegality of Trump’s candidacy could only be addressed by the Congress after his election. That would be akin to asking the Congress to do what Trump is now being accused of asking the Congress to do against Joe Biden after the 2020 election.

Jason Murray, the young lawyer appearing for the Colorado petitioners, acquitted himself very well against some tough questioning by Justices during the oral hearing. Later on in media interviews, Mr. Murray acknowledged the tough questions he faced, but pointed out that he faced the same questions before the Colorado Supreme Court. He said he is hopeful that as with the Colorado judges, the Supreme Court Justices would also have to deal with the illegality of Trump’s candidacy in spite of their initial skepticism about the practicality of doing it.

Donald Trump is facing multiple indictments, involving numerous charges, in multiple courts. Perhaps no American before him, let alone a former President, has been simultaneously implicated in so many litigations. At the same time, even as he is mired in multiple cases, Donald Trump has also put on trial the entire American political system.



Features

New US sanctions on ICC, a fillip to worldwide political repression

Published

on

The International Criminal Court in session. UN Photo/Eskinder Debebe

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s warning to the International Criminal Court (ICC) was stark: ‘Either the ICC will end its threats, or we will end the ICC.’ It followed US central administration accusations that the court was unfairly targeting Americans on the basis of trumped-up war crimes charges.

However, a new plethora of sanctions has been clamped on the ICC by the US, which in turn has spurred accusations by sections of the world that the latter has unleashed an ‘assault’ on the international legal order.

What some of the sanctions would mean for the ICC was outlined by Rubio: ‘We will ban transactions with this rogue court, cutting off their resources and crippling their ability to operate against us.’

The ICC has shown consistency of purpose over the years. Despite some operational constraints it has indicted a large number of political strongmen from around the world, accused of war crimes and other governance excesses that come under its purview. Two such recent figures are: Russian President Vladimir Putin and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Rather than enjoy a mere nominal presence in the world community, the ICC has proved its effectiveness by detaining and bringing to justice scores of VIP politicians and others of their ilk who have been found guilty of human rights abuses and kindred excesses that come within the terms of reference of the ICC.

Accordingly, the international justice system would be stymied considerably as a result of the ICC being dis-empowered, particularly financially. Needless to say, potential and real perpetrators of the species of crime coming under the jurisdiction of the ICC would stand to gain most from such anarchic tendencies. That is, political repression globally would be enabled to enjoy a new lease of life.

A detailing of the types of crime coming under the purview of the ICC provides an idea of what it would cost the international community if the ICC’s operations are gravely hampered. They are mainly: genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and the crime of aggression.

That is, the part of the world to be worst affected would be the global South, since the latter is awash with the mentioned crimes. Needless to say, a chronically-disaffected South will sooner rather than later undermine the well being of the world dangerously. The world is already being put through these paces.

At the time of writing, ‘illegal migrants’ from the South, for example, are aggravating many a Western economy’s woes, besides creating for them acute law and order issues. The fact that these migrants’ presence goes on to become a virtual test of the migrant receiving states’ ability to forge domestic social inclusion in the face of jingoistic protests by mainly white supremacist groups is evidence of the latter. As is known, the US, to take just one example, has been up against this crisis for quite a while.

Accordingly, it will be in the best interests of the West if ‘illegal’ migrant arrivals on their shores are stemmed. If the socio-political and economic problems assailing the South are effectively managed through North-South collaborative, ‘trouble-shooting’ efforts the causes leading to ‘illegal’ migration and connected issues could be resolved at source as it were. For, it is the aggravation of the South’s material questions that lays the basis for the emergence of repressive and anti-democratic regimes in the hemisphere.

Until such time that the aforementioned issues in North-South relations are visited afresh and addressed urgently, a vibrantly functioning ICC would be needed. For, the latter would prove a deterrent to Southern political and military strongmen, highly prone to power abuse and like excesses, from coming into being in the wake of the South’s chronic material woes and the wars and conflicts that result from them.

It stands to reason then that the US would be acting in its own interests by enabling the ICC to perpetuate its mandate without hindrance. For a crop of issues that impinges negatively on internal law and order would be defused.

Meanwhile, there needs to be a meeting of minds among the rest of the West to put back in place a North-South dialogue process aimed at reducing some of the economic pressures that are weighing on the South.

Since economics usually drives politics it will be in the interests of the world community to scrutinizingly re-visit North-South issues of the past and put in place economic relief packages for Southern publics that would enable them to tide over their material hardships rather than permit the latter to aggravate into social disaffection and eventually armed militancy. It is the latter juncture that paves the way for the emergence of authoritarian rulers in the South who then go on to be a blight on their publics.

Accordingly, the Southern-based global development thinking of the past that envisaged a more equitable world economic order needs to be seen as an urgent need. That is, NAM’s international development paradigms need to be resuscitated to the extent possible.

It is unlikely that rightist governments of the West, such as the current Republican administration in the US, would find these projects feasible, but democratic states of Europe, led by perhaps the UK, are likely to think otherwise. For it would not be beneficial for the democratic world to be having on their hands repressive governments in the South who would be gravitating towards the major military and economic actors of the South, such as Iran and North Korea, who tend to be in constant power struggles with the West.

However, until such time that the mentioned, pro-people initiatives are given serious thought the ICC would need to be enabled by the international community to be in place comfortably and carry on with its mandate of bringing repressive rulers to book. Besides the ICC should pave the way for the peoples of the developing world to enjoy some substantial respite from the political repression and even terror which tend to be their lot.

Meanwhile, the wars of West Asia are relentlessly aggravating the economic hardships of people everywhere, driving the point home to enlightened sections that there is no alternative to peacemaking. A challenge is to convert the US under President Trump to this line of thinking.

Continue Reading

Features

Clear, soft and shine-free skin

Published

on

This week, I give you five simple, time-tested homemade remedies that help reduce the appearance of blemishes, control excess shine and leave your skin feeling softer and smoother.

The Honey and Lemon Brightening Dab:

For stubborn blemish marks, this is a classic. Mix one teaspoon of pure bee honey with three to four drops of fresh lemon juice. Apply gently, only on the affected spots, and leave for 10 minutes before rinsing with lukewarm water. While honey soothes and softens, lemon helps to brighten naturally. Use twice a week in the evening.

Besan and Rose Water Oil-Control Pack:

An ideal remedy to combat shine, especially on the T-zone. Take two teaspoons of besan (gram flour) and mix with sufficient rose water to form a smooth paste. Add a pinch of turmeric for its antiseptic goodness. Apply evenly, keep for 15 minutes and wash off. It absorbs excess oil without over-drying, leaving a beautiful matte finish.

Aloe Vera and Cucumber Ice Soother:

Blend fresh aloe vera gel with the juice of a grated cucumber and freeze the mixture in an ice tray. Each morning, wrap one cube in a soft muslin cloth and gently rub over a cleansed face for 30 seconds. It calms, tightens pores and imparts a baby-soft smoothness.

Oatmeal and Curd Gentle Polish:

Roughness and old blemish marks need gentle exfoliation. Combine one tablespoon of finely powdered oatmeal with one tablespoon of fresh curd (yoghurt). Massage very gently, in circular motions, for one minute, leave for five minutes and rinse. It removes dead cells and unveils softer, clearer skin.

 Multani Mitti and Green Tea Magic Mask:

Brew some green tea and allow it to cool completely. Mix one and a half teaspoons of Multani Mitti (Fuller’s Earth) with the tea water to make a fine paste. Apply for 10 to 12 minutes – do not let it dry and crack completely – and wash off. It draws out impurities, fades blemishes and bestows a fresh, shine-free glow.

A Gentle Reminder:

As with any natural remedy, always do a patch test on your inner arm first. For those with oily or combination skin, avoid heavy coconut oil application and harsh scrubbing, as they tend to aggravate shine and blemishes.

Continue Reading

Features

Compete, shine and be discovered at WCOPA 2027

Published

on

Dream of performing on a world stage? Well, here is your unique, golden opportunity!

The World Championships of Performing Arts (WCOPA) — the one and only official “Talent Olympics” — is the world’s premier global platform for aspiring singers, dancers, actors, models, instrumentalists, etc., to compete, shine and be discovered!

And, yes, this world stage is open to YOU, Sri Lankans living in Sri Lanka and overseas!

Held annually in glittering Las Vegas, WCOPA brings together over 70 countries, all competing for Gold, Silver and Bronze Medals, just like the traditional Olympics.

Lakisha Bernard: Will represent Team Sri Lanka at WCOPA 2027

Outstanding performers vie for the coveted titles of Junior and Senior Grand Champion Performer of the World, with winners and standout participants awarded over $500,000 in scholarships, cash awards and prizes to catapult their education and careers!

Sri Lanka is already making waves! At WCOPA 2026, Natharie Wickramasinghe, representing Team Sri Lanka, made the nation proud by winning a Bronze Medal in the Ethnic/Folklore Dance category!

Lakisha: Accomplished freelance Model and Fashion Design graduate

Recruitment for this prestigious competition is handled through a system of scouts and licensed National Directors — and this is where our very own Chris Rajendra, now based in Las Vegas, and National Director for Team Sri Lanka, comes into the scene.

If you are a singer, dancer, actor, model, instrumentalist — if you have talent burning inside you — contact Chris Rajendra today for registration and, who knows, you may find yourself in Las Vegas, and proudly draped in the Sri Lankan flag, at WCOPA 2027!

The contact address is: Chris Rajendra, wcopa.nationaldirector.sl@gmail.com

or chris.rajendra@gmail.com

Meanwhile, a star is born for 2027, in the form of Lakisha Bernard who is all set to represent Team Sri Lanka at WCOPA 2027.

Originally hailing from the sun-drenched coastal city of Colombo and now carving out her creative career in Canada, 22-year-old Lakisha is stepping into the international spotlight.

This accomplished freelance Model and Fashion Design graduate has officially been appointed as the Team Sri Lanka Promoter for Canada as she prepares to represent Team Sri Lanka at WCOPA in Las Vegas.

Lakisha brings a unique blend of high-fashion sensibility, captivating camera presence and expert garment design to the Team.

Having built her career, from local college shoots to high-glamour concepts, Lakisha’s inspiring journey embodies the true spirit of cultural bridge-building and creative resilience, bringing immense pride and recognition to Sri Lanka on the global stage.

WCOPA 2027 will be held at the legendary Westgate Hotel & Casino, Las Vegas, from 12th to 20th July – the very same iconic arena where the late, great Elvis Presley himself performed!

Your moment is now. Your stage is Las Vegas, so hurry and contact Chris Rajendra.

Continue Reading

Trending