What do Trump's Colorado Ballot Case, Gore v. Bush, and Kyle Rittenhouse Have in Common?
After the 9-0 United States Supreme Court ruling that individual states can’t use the 14th Amendment to keep Donald Trump off the ballot in this year’s presidential election I thought about a couple of earlier legal cases that didn’t go the way the political left wanted: Kyle Rittenhouse and Gore v. Bush.
In each of those cases, there were all sorts of legal experts on the left who predicted that Trump, and Bush should and would lose and that Rittenhouse should and would be convicted in the Kenosha shootings. At the same time, those in the libertarian and conservative camps said the law was clear and that Bush and Trump should prevail at SCOTUS and that Kyle Rittenhouse was obviously acting in self-defense.
Trump just won 9-0, the Bush/Gore decisions were 9-0 and 7-2 if memory serves me well. In those cases liberal justices sided with those libertarian and conservative commenters. Rittenhouse was acquitted of all five charges against him.
In sports, when your side gets blown out like that, it usually means a lack of talent, a poor game plan, and a general lack of knowledge about the game itself.
Maybe it’s time to stop giving so much credence to leftist legal activists portraying themselves as impartial legal experts.
Yeah, I know that Trump got terrible legal advice in challenging the 2020 election results (though I don’t think he did anything illegal regarding Georgia and Arizona), but there were plenty of voices on the right that said exactly that as it was happening. If you can show me a single left-leaning legal pundit that predicted Trump would win 9-0 at SCOTUS this week, I’ll be very surprised.
Perhaps the best advice that I’ve ever received was don’t defend a mistake. It seems to me that defending mistakes is what today’s Democrats do best.