Connect with us

Features

WILL TRUMP BE DISQUALIFIED FROM RUNNING IN 2024?

Published

on

by Vijaya Chandrasoma

On August 19, University of Chicago Law Professor William Baude and University of St. Thomas Professor Michael Stokes Paulsen, both members of the right-wing Federalist Society, published a paper, to the effect that, “based on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, if the public record is accurate, the case is not even close. Trump is no longer eligible to (run for) the office of the Presidency”.

At that time, this interpretation of the 14th Amendment was regarded by the media and the legal community as mere conjecture, with no real teeth to prevent Trump’s presidential candidacy.However, since then, there has been increasing momentum amongst the legal community, confirming the constitutional argument that Trump could be disbarred from the presidency.

The latest opinion came from Lawrence Tribe, Professor Emeritus of Constitutional Law at Harvard University, Founder of the American Constitution Society and deemed one of the nation’s foremost authorities on Constitutional Law.

Professor Tribe said on CNN’s State of the Union last Sunday: “The people who wrote the 14th Amendment were not fools. They realized that if those people who tried to overturn the country, who tried to get rid of our peaceful transitions of power are again put in power, that would be end of the nation, the end of democracy”.

Michael J. Luttig, one of the country’s best known conservative jurists and key adviser to former Vice-President Pence said, in an interview with the Washington Post, “250 years ago, we had a revolution against the king, created a new nation and a new Constitution to govern the nation…. The former president attempted to overturn an election that he had lost fair and square, incited the attack on January 6 in order to prevent the Joint Session (of Congress} from counting the electoral votes to determine the presidency of the United States of America”…. If he runs again, “Donald Trump, in the end, will be allowed to make a mockery out of the Constitution of the United States and the Rule of Law”.

Section 3 of the 14th Amendment is a self-executing provision of the US Constitution, a provision that can be enforced without the aid of a legislative enactment, like a conviction.

“The former president’s efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election, and the resulting attack on the US Capitol, place him squarely within the ambit of the disqualification clause, and he is therefore ineligible to serve as president ever again”, wrote Tribe and Luttig.

The final ruling will probably be determined by the Supreme Court, which gives Trump a 6/3 advantage. However, if the Justices rule not on Party lines but on a strict interpretation of the Constitution and their conscience, as they did on the 2020 election disputes, there is every chance that the majority of the Court will uphold the provisions of the 14th Amendment and rule that Trump is not qualified to run for or hold any public office in the United States in the future.

A lawsuit has already been filed by Noah Bookbinder, President of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), in Colorado which states: “Having disqualified himself from public office by violating Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, Donald Trump must be removed from the (Colorado State) ballot. January 6 was an unprecedented attack, exactly the kind of event, against which the framers of the 14th Amendment built such protections. You don’t break the glass unless there’s an emergency”.

With 13 months and four criminal trials to go before the November 2024 election, there will surely be many more lawsuits, filed by secretaries of state of Red and Blue states, to disqualify Trump from running.

Trump himself is currently providing the best evidence for his own disqualification with his post-arrest rantings, at TV interviews and campaign rallies. These may prove to be more effective than any legal interpretation of a constitutional amendment.

Trump is every prosecutor’s dream defendant, and every defense lawyer’s nightmare. He contradicts himself and admits to the many charges against him almost every time he opens his mouth at campaign rallies and interviews.

Last week, in an address at a Washington DC Pray Vote Stand summit, Trump stated that Joe Biden was “cognitively impaired” and would “lead the country into World War II if re-elected”. World War II ended in 1945. In the same speech, Trump said that he was “ahead of Obama in the 2024 election polls”, mixing up Presidents Obama and Biden. He also said that Obama was his opponent in 2016, “With Obama, we won an election that everyone said couldn’t be won”. Hillary Clinton was his opponent in 2016.

President Biden may be 80 years old, but compared to the mental and moral wasteland that is the 77 year-old Trump, he’s an intellectual giant, who gave a stirring oration at the United Nations General Assembly last week.

At an exclusive interview with Kristen Welker, aired on NBC Meet the Press on Sunday, September 17, Trump contradicted both himself and the positions taken by defense lawyers on numerous occasions. A few extracts:

He declined to answer the question posed by Ms. Welker on how he spent the afternoon of the insurrection on January 6, 2021. “I am not going to tell you. I’ll tell people later at an appropriate time”. Trump’s aides have already confirmed, under oath, that he had sequestered himself in a room off the Oval Office to watch the violence on TV. It took him 187 minutes to order the insurrectionists to stop the violence and to go home.

About the alleged fraudulent 2020 election, Trump said that “It was my decision, that the 2020 election was rigged, there was no question about it”. A statement in direct contradiction of his defense lawyers’ mendacious argument that he was merely going by the advice of his White House counsel, who convinced him that the election had been rigged.

In truth, his own Attorney General, William Barr, and many White House aides have already given evidence on oath that they had told Trump that there was no evidence of election fraud.

When asked about the mishandling of government top-secret documents stored at unsecured Mar a Lago locations, Trump said, “They were my documents. I could have fought them. I didn’t have to give them back” (to the National Archives). A total legal delusion. Those documents were the property of the US government.

When asked if he would testify to this effect, he said, “Sure, I’m going to – I’ll testify”. Trump’s defense lawyers will never let him get a mile near the witness box. He covers up one lie with another, he’ll be found guilty of perjury within minutes.

The impeachment of President Biden, proposed recently by Republican Speaker McCarthy, was based on minor charges against his son, Hunter. McCarthy also talked vaguely about “other high crimes” of the “Biden Crime Family” without a vestige of facts or evidence. He denies this is retaliation, the classic quid quo pro – “They did it to us, we do it to them”.

The Republican Congress recently accused the Attorney General Merrick Garland and the Department of Justice of showing a double standard in the treatment of the respective crimes of Hunter Biden and Donald Trump. Sure, there was a double standard. The crimes under investigation of Hunter Biden, private citizen, were three gun-related offences. The crimes of former President Trump, indicted, arrested and released on conditional bail, are espionage, sedition, obstruction of justice, sexual assaults and financial fraud. A ridiculous comparison. Apples and oranges, many, many rotten oranges.

Trump claimed that the Democratic Speaker Nancy Pelosi was somehow responsible for the January 6 insurrection. This statement is preposterous, even by Trump standards. Pelosi was one of the two main targets (the first being Vice-President Pence) of the insurrectionists. She did not have the authority to call for immediate Capitol Police and National Guard reinforcements to quell the violence. Only Trump did. And he didn’t, for 187 minutes, in spite of desperate calls from Vice-President Pence, Speaker Pelosi and Republican Minority House Leader McCarthy.

When asked about abortion rights, Trump said the Republican positions were “terrible”, though he held these same positions during his presidency. In fact, he once announced at a rally that Democrats allowed abortion after childbirth, a typically moronic statement, as such an act ceases to be abortion. Killing an infant is murder.

He now seeks to portray himself as a “deal maker”, making vague and confused comments on the “number of weeks after which he would ban abortion”, and whether it’s a decision that should be “left to the state or the federal government”. He is softening his stance on abortion because he has realized it’s going to be a major factor in the 2024 election.

Abortion is a decision to be made by the pregnant woman (or the parents, where relevant, of a pregnant minor) and her doctor. It is certainly not a decision for old white geezers, who barely know what an uterus is, who demand Victorian sexual morals of others, while being lecherously liberal of their own.

Special Counsel Jack Smith is seeking an order to prevent Trump from making inflammatory, intimidating and threatening remarks against witnesses, prosecutors and judges. “Through his statements, the defendant threatens to undermine the integrity of these proceedings and prejudice the jury pool”.

Trump has shown no signs of toning down his comments, even though his arrest and release were on conditional bail. He keeps repeating his lies that “the FBI and Justice Department are weaponized”, that “President Biden is crooked” and Special Counsel Smith is “deranged”. He even claimed that Judge Chutkan was a Trump hater, and insists that she recuse herself.

“They Leak, Lie & Sue, and they won’t allow me to SPEAK”, Trump wrote on his social media. Special Counsel “Smith wants to take away my rights to speak freely and openly under the First Amendment”. His lawyers should advise him that specific threats, especially those with an intent of causing bodily harm and endangering lives, are not protected by the First Amendment.

Trump’s desperate defense strategy is obvious. Left without any restraints, he will order his thugs (the process has already begun) to send death threats to witnesses, prosecutors and their families. He will poison the jury pools, so that a unanimous verdict may not be possible. The judge may have to call a mistrial, which he will trumpet to his base as proof of his innocence, a triumph.

Judge Chutkan, the presiding judge over the case against Trump on the alleged felony of sedition in the January 6 insurrection, had imposed certain conditions on Trump on his release on bail. Trump has already flouted these conditions.

Special Counsel Smith has now filed a request for a “narrowly tailored gag order” on Trump, limiting how he would be able to publicly comment on any of the cases against him. However, knowing Trump and the certainty that he will violate such a gag order, Judge Chutkan may well have to reconsider more Draconian measures to restrain Trump from interfering in the judicial process in the future, up to and including imprisonment.



Features

Ethnic-related problems need solutions now

Published

on

President Dissanayake in Jaffna

In the space of 15 months, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has visited the North of the country more than any other president or prime minister. These were not flying visits either. The president most recent visit to Jaffna last week was on the occasion of Thai Pongal to celebrate the harvest and the dawning of a new season. During the two days he spent in Jaffna, the president launched the national housing project, announced plans to renovate Palaly Airport, to expedite operations at the Kankesanthurai Port, and pledged once again that racism would have no place in the country.

There is no doubt that the president’s consistent presence in the north has had a reassuring effect. His public rejection of racism and his willingness to engage openly with ethnic and religious minorities have helped secure his acceptance as a national leader rather than a communal one. In the fifteen months since he won the presidential election, there have been no inter community clashes of any significance. In a country with a long history of communal tension, this relative calm is not accidental. It reflects a conscious political choice to lower the racial temperature rather than inflame it.

But preventing new problems is only part of the task of governing. While the government under President Dissanayake has taken responsibility for ensuring that anti-minority actions are not permitted on its watch, it has yet to take comparable responsibility for resolving long standing ethnic and political problems inherited from previous governments. These problems may appear manageable because they have existed for years, even decades. Yet their persistence does not make them innocuous. Beneath the surface, they continue to weaken trust in the state and erode confidence in its ability to deliver justice.

Core Principle

A core principle of governance is responsibility for outcomes, not just intentions. Governments do not begin with a clean slate. Governments do not get to choose only the problems they like. They inherit the state in full, with all its unresolved disputes, injustices and problemmatic legacies. To argue that these are someone else’s past mistakes is politically convenient but institutionally dangerous. Unresolved problems have a habit of resurfacing at the most inconvenient moments, often when a government is trying to push through reforms or stabilise the economy.

This reality was underlined in Geneva last week when concerns were raised once again about allegations of sexual abuse that occurred during the war, affecting both men and women who were taken into government custody. Any sense that this issue had faded from international attention was dispelled by the release of a report by the Office of the Human Rights High Commissioner titled “Sri Lanka: Report on conflict related sexual violence”, dated 13.01.26. Such reports do not emerge in a vacuum. They are shaped by the absence of credible domestic processes that investigate allegations, establish accountability and offer redress. They also shape international perceptions, influence diplomatic relationships and affect access to cooperation and support.

Other unresolved problems from the past continue to fester. These include the continued detention of Tamil prisoners under the Prevention of Terrorism Act, in some cases for many years without conclusion, the failure to return civilian owned land taken over by the military during the war, and the fate of thousands of missing persons whose families still seek answers. These are not marginal issues even when they are not at the centre stage. They affect real lives and entire communities. Their cumulative effect is corrosive, undermining efforts to restore normalcy and rebuild confidence in public institutions.

Equal Rights

Another area where delay will prove costly is the resettlement of Malaiyaha Tamil communities affected by the recent cyclone in the central hills, which was the worst affected region in the country. Even as President Dissanayake celebrated Thai Pongal in Jaffna to the appreciation of the people there, Malaiyaha Tamils engaged in peaceful campaigns to bring attention to their unresolved problems. In Colombo at the Liberty Roundabout, a number of them gathered to symbolically celebrate Thai Pongal while also bringing national attention to the issues of their community, in particular the problem of displacement after the cyclone.

The impact of the cyclone, and the likelihood of future ones under conditions of climate change, make it necessary for the displaced Malaiyaha Tamils to be found new places of residence. This is also an opportunity to tackle the problem of their landlessness in a comprehensive manner and make up for decades if not two centuries of inequity.

Planning for relocation and secure housing is good governance. This needs to be done soon. Climate related disasters do not respect political timetables. They punish delay and indecision. A government that prides itself on system change cannot respond to such challenges with temporary fixes.

The government appears concerned that finding new places for the Malaiyaha Tamil people to be resettled will lead to land being taken away from plantation companies which are said to be already struggling for survival. Due to the economic crisis the country has faced since it went bankrupt in 2022, the government has been deferential to the needs of company owners who are receiving most favoured treatment. As a result, the government is contemplating solutions such as high rise apartments and townhouse style housing to minimise the use of land.

Such solutions cannot substitute for a comprehensive strategy that includes consultations with the affected population and addresses their safety, livelihoods and community stability.

Lose Trust

Most of those who voted for the government at the last elections did so in the hope that it would bring about system change. They did not vote for the government to reinforce the same patterns that the old system represented. At its core, system change means rebalancing priorities. It means recognising that economic efficiency without social justice is a short-term gain with long-term costs. It means understanding that unresolved ethnic grievances, unaddressed wartime abuses and unequal responses to disaster will eventually undermine any development programme, no matter how well designed. Governance that postpones difficult decisions may buy time, but lose trust.

The coming year will therefore be decisive. The government must show that its commitment to non racism and inclusion extends beyond conflict prevention to conflict resolution. Addressing conflict related abuses, concluding long standing detentions, returning land, accounting for the missing and securing dignified resettlement for displaced communities are not distractions from the government programme. They are central to it. A government committed to genuine change must address the problems it inherited, or run the risk of being overwhelmed when those problems finally demand settlement.

by Jehan Perera

Continue Reading

Features

Education. Reform. Disaster: A Critical Pedagogical Approach

Published

on

PM Amarasuriya

This Kuppi writing aims to engage critically with the current discussion on the reform initiative “Transforming General Education in Sri Lanka 2025,” focusing on institutional and structural changes, including the integration of a digitally driven model alongside curriculum development, teacher training, and assessment reforms. By engaging with these proposed institutional and structural changes through the parameters of the division and recognition of labour, welfare and distribution systems, and lived ground realities, the article develops a critical perspective on the current reform discourse. By examining both the historical context and the present moment, the article argues that these institutional and structural changes attempt to align education with a neoliberal agenda aimed at enhancing the global corporate sector by producing “skilled” labour. This agenda is further evaluated through the pedagogical approach of socialist feminist scholarship. While the reforms aim to produce a ‘skilled workforce with financial literacy,’ this writing raises a critical question: whose labour will be exploited to achieve this goal? Why and What Reform to Education

In exploring why, the government of Sri Lanka seeks to introduce reforms to the current education system, the Prime Minister and Minister of Education, Higher Education, and Vocational Education, Dr. Harini Amarasuriya, revealed in a recent interview on 15 January 2026 on News First Sri Lanka that such reforms are a pressing necessity. According to the philosophical tradition of education reform, curriculum revision and prevailing learning and teaching structures are expected every eight years; however, Sri Lanka has not undertaken such revisions for the past ten years. The renewal of education is therefore necessary, as the current system produces structural issues, including inequality in access to quality education and the need to create labour suited to the modern world. Citing her words, the reforms aim to create “intelligent, civil-minded citizens” in order to build a country where people live in a civilised manner, work happily, uphold democratic principles, and live dignified lives.

Interpreting her narrative, I claim that the reform is intended to produce, shape, and develop a workforce for the neoliberal economy, now centralised around artificial intelligence and machine learning. My socialist feminist perspective explains this further, referring to Rosa Luxemburg’s reading on reforms for social transformation. As Luxemburg notes, although the final goal of reform is to transform the existing order into a better and more advanced system: The question remains: does this new order truly serve the working class? In the case of education, the reform aims to transform children into “intelligent, civil-minded citizens.” Yet, will the neoliberal economy they enter, and the advanced technological industries that shape it, truly provide them a better life, when these industries primarily seek surplus profit?

History suggests otherwise. Sri Lanka has repeatedly remained at the primary manufacturing level within neoliberal industries. The ready-made garment industry, part of the global corporate fashion system, provides evidence: it exploited both manufacturing labourers and brand representatives during structural economic changes in the 1980s. The same pattern now threatens to repeat in the artificial intelligence sector, raising concerns about who truly benefits from these education reforms

That historical material supports the claim that the primary manufacturing labour for the artificial intelligence industry will similarly come from these workers, who are now being trained as skilled employees who follow the system rather than question it. This context can be theorised through Luxemburg’s claim that critical thinking training becomes a privileged instrument, alienating the working class from such training, an approach that neoliberalism prefers to adopt in the global South.

Institutional and Structural Gaps

Though the government aims to address the institutional and structural gaps, I claim that these gaps will instead widen due to the deeply rooted system of uneven distribution in the country. While agreeing to establish smart classrooms, the critical query is the absence of a wide technological welfare system across the country. From electricity to smart equipment, resources remain inadequate, and the government lags behind in taking prompt initiative to meet these requirements.

This issue is not only about the unavailability of human and material infrastructure, but also about the absence of a plan to restore smart normalcy after natural disasters, particularly the resumption of smart network connections. Access to smart learning platforms, such as the internet, for schoolchildren is a high-risk factor that requires not only the monitoring of classroom teachers but also the involvement of the state. The state needs to be vigilant of abuses and disinformation present in the smart-learning space, an area in which Sri Lanka is still lagging. This concern is not only about the safety of children but also about the safety of women. For example, the recent case of abusive image production via Elon Musk’s AI chatbox, X, highlights the urgent need for a legal framework in Sri Lanka.

Considering its geographical location, Sri Lanka is highly vulnerable to natural disasters, the frequency in which they occur, increasing, owing to climate change. Ditwah is a recent example, where villages were buried alive by landslides, rivers overflowed, and families were displaced, losing homes that they had built over their lifetimes. The critical question, then, is: despite the government’s promise to integrate climate change into the curriculum, how can something still ‘in the air ‘with climate adaptation plans yet to be fully established, be effectively incorporated into schools?

Looking at the demographic map of the country, the expansion of the elderly population, the dependent category, requires attention. Considering the physical and psychological conditions of this group, fostering “intelligent, civic-minded” citizens necessitates understanding the elderly not as a charity case but as a human group deserving dignity. This reflects a critical reading of the reform content: what, indeed, is to be taught? This critical aspect further links with the next section of reflective of ground reality.

Reflective Narrative of Ground Reality

Despite the government asserting that the “teacher” is central to this reform, critical engagement requires examining how their labour is recognised. In Sri Lanka, teachers’ work has long been tied to social recognition, both utilised and exploited, Teachers receive low salaries while handling multiple roles: teaching, class management, sectional duties, and disciplinary responsibilities.

At present, a total teaching load is around 35 periods a week, with 28 periods spent in classroom teaching. The reform adds continuous assessments, portfolio work, projects, curriculum preparation, peer coordination, and e-knowledge, to the teacher’s responsibilities. These are undeclared forms of labour, meaning that the government assigns no economic value to them; yet teachers perform these tasks as part of a long-standing culture. When this culture is unpacked, the gendered nature of this undeclared labour becomes clear. It is gendered because the majority of schoolteachers are women, and their unpaid roles remain unrecognised. It is worth citing some empirical narratives to illustrate this point:

When there was an extra-school event, like walks, prize-giving, or new openings, I stayed after school to design some dancing and practice with the students. I would never get paid for that extra time,” a female dance teacher in the Western Province shared.

I cite this single empirical account, and I am certain that many teachers have similar stories to share.

Where the curriculum is concerned, schoolteachers struggle to complete each lesson as planned due to time constraints and poor infrastructure. As explained by a teacher in the Central Province:

It is difficult to have a reliable internet connection. Therefore, I use the hotspot on my phone so the children can access the learning material.”

Using their own phones and data for classroom activities is not part of a teacher’s official duties, but a culture has developed around the teaching role that makes such decisions necessary. Such activities related to labour risks further exploitation under the reform if the state remains silent in providing the necessary infrastructure.

Considering that women form the majority of the teaching profession, none of the reforms so far have taken women’s health issues seriously. These issues could be exacerbated by the extra stress arising from multiple job roles. Many female teachers particularly those with young children, those in peri- or post-menopause stages of their life, or those with conditions like endometriosis may experience aggravated health problems due to work-related stress intensified by the reform. This raises a critical question: what role does the state play in addressing these issues?

In Conclusion

The following suggestions are put forward:

First and foremost, the government should clearly declare the fundamental plan of the reform, highlighting why, what, when, and how it will be implemented. This plan should be grounded in the realities of the classroom, focusing on being child-centred and teacher-focused.

Technological welfare interventions are necessary, alongside a legal framework to ensure the safety and security of accessing the smart, information-centred world. Furthermore, teachers’ labour should be formally recognised and assigned economic value. Currently, under neoliberal logic, teachers are often left to navigate these challenges on their own, as if the choice is between survival or collapse.

Aruni Samarakoon teaches at the Department of Public Policy, University of Ruhuna

Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy happening on the margins of the lecture hall that parodies, subverts, and simultaneously reaffirms social hierarchies.

By Aruni Samarakoon

Continue Reading

Features

Smartphones and lyrics stands…

Published

on

Diliup Gabadamudalige: Artistes can stay at home and hire their avatar for concerts, movies, etc.

Diliup Gabadamudalige is, indeed, a maestro where music is concerned, and this is what he had to say, referring to our Seen ‘N’ Heard in The Island of 6th January, 2026, and I totally agree with his comments.

Diliup: “AI avatars will take over these concerts. It will take some time, but it surely will happen in the near future. Artistes can stay at home and hire their avatar for concerts, movies, etc. Lyrics and dance moves, even gymnastics can be pre-trained”.

Yes, and that would certainly be unsettling as those without talent will make use of AI to deceive the public.

Right now at most events you get the stage crowded with lyrics stands and, to make matters even worse, some of the artistes depend on the smartphone to put over a song – checking out the lyrics, on the smartphone, every few seconds!

In the good ole days, artistes relied on their talent, stage presence, and memorisation skills to dominate the stage.

They would rehearse till they knew the lyrics by heart and focus on connecting with the audience.

Smartphones and lyrics stands: A common sight these days

The ability of the artiste to keep the audience entertained, from start to finish, makes a live performance unforgettable That’s the magic of a great show!

When an artiste’s energy is contagious, and they’re clearly having a blast, the audience feeds off it and gets taken on an exciting ride. It’s like the whole crowd is vibing on the same frequency.

Singing with feeling, on stage, creates this electric connection with the audience, but it can’t be done with a smartphone in one hand and lyrics stands lined up on the stage.

AI’s gonna shake things up in the music scene, for sure – might replace some roles, like session musicians or sound designers – but human talent will still shine!

AI can assist, but it’s tough to replicate human emotion, experience, and soul in music.

In the modern world, I guess artistes will need to blend old-school vibes with new tech but certainly not with smartphones and lyrics stands!

Continue Reading

Trending