Home 2024

Legal Theorists Try To Attack Trump. Their Argument May Be Dead On Arrival.

Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

A novel legal theory from two conservative legal scholars published in the University of Pennsylvania Law Review that a section of the 14th Amendment makes Donald Trump ineligible to run for president may be getting a court hearing in Florida.

As Ballot Access news editor emeritus Richard Winger notes:

On August 24, a Florida voter, Lawrence Caplan, filed a federal lawsuit seeking to bar former President Donald Trump from being placed on 2024 ballots as a presidential candidate. Caplan v Trump, s.d., 0:23cv-61618.

Caplan, who appears to be representing himself in the case, writes:

Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which provides for the disqualification of an individual who commits insurrection against our government has remained on the books for some one hundred and fifty plus years without ever facing question as to its legitimacy. While one can certainly argue that it has not been thoroughly tested, that fact is only because we have not faced an insurrection against our federal government such as the one while we faced on January 6, 2021. It should also be noted that President Trump has since made statements to the effect that should he be elected, he would advocate the total elimination of the US Constitution and the creation of a new charter more in line with his personal values.

Winger believes Caplan’s suit is “misguided:”

The Fourteenth Amendment “insurrection clause” bars individuals from being sworn in to certain offices, but it does not bar them from seeking the office. When the Fourteenth Amendment was passed, there was no mechanism to prevent any voter from voting for any candidate.

Caplan appears to be taking the law review article’s authors, William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulson, at their word:

“No official should shrink from these duties. It would be wrong — indeed, arguably itself a breach of one’s constitutional oath of office — to abandon one’s responsibilities of faithful interpretation, application, and enforcement of Section Three,” Bode and Paulsen write.

Alternatively, ordinary citizens could file challenges on the same grounds with state election officials themselves.

And other such suits may emerge over the coming weeks. I’m not convinced any federal judge will be willing to read Section 3 like Baude and Paulson say it should be. It’s not because the Section’s words aren’t clear – they are.

My concerns are akin to those of Cato’s Walter Olsen, who writes:

…no one should assume that just because Baude and Paulsen have made a powerful intellectual case for their originalist reading, that the Supreme Court will declare itself convinced and disqualify Trump. Justice Antonin Scalia memorably described himself as a “faint‐​hearted originalist,” which captures something important about the thinking of almost every Justice—if overruling a wrongly decided old case threatens to disrupt settled expectations to the point of spreading chaos and grief through society, most of them will refrain. Stare decisis, and a general preference for continuity in law, still matters.

Exactly. While some judges may nurse images of themselves as bold crusaders for justice, most jurists aren’t eager to upset established practice and precedent on a whim. Though, to be fair to the times when such upsets have occurred – Brown v. Board of Education, for example, or Griswold v. Connecticut – have been warranted, necessary, and beneficial.

Does that apply in the Caplan case? A court will decide. But as I’ve long said about Trump, the only court he cares about is public opinion. If voters reject him, that will carry more weight and sanction than any court could ever deliver.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk. It first appeared in American Liberty News. Republished with permission.

Obama Appointed Judge Makes Shocking Pro-Trump Decision

The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

A judge appointed by Barack Obama has issued a decisive response to a lawsuit filed by a group that claims Donald Trump’s involvement in the U.S. Capitol attack renders him unfit for office.

Judge Robin L. Rosenberg ruled the plaintiffs, led by Boynton Beach attorney Lawrence Caplan, lacked standing to bring a federal lawsuit against the former president, citing the 14th Amendment’s restriction on insurrectionists holding office.

The Washington Times has more on Rosenberg’s response and the ensuing fallout:

“Plaintiffs lack standing to challenge defendant’s qualifications for seeking the presidency, as the injuries alleged are not cognizable and not particular to them,” the judge wrote.

Lawrence Caplan of Boynton Beach argued in a federal court filing with the Southern District of Florida that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution prevents someone from holding power in the U.S. government if that individual has rebelled against the government through an insurrection or aided its enemies.

In his filing, Mr. Caplan refers to it as the “disqualification clause” and says it can operate independently of criminal proceedings. But he noted that special counsel Jack Smith has indicted Mr. Trump over the U.S. Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021, and allegedly attempting to undermine the 2020 election.

The legal filing also noted Georgia prosecutors have charged the ex-president and his allies with election interference, among other allegations.

“President Trump’s efforts both in Washington, as well as in Georgia and perhaps other states, as well as the consequential assault on the U.S. Capitol, put Trump at the center of the disqualification clause, and as a result of which, make him ineligible to ever serve in federal office again,” Caplan added.

READ NEXT: Woman Opens Fire On Carjacking Suspect At Philly Gas Station

This piece was first published in American Liberty News. Republished with permission.

Blake Masters Looks To Run For Arizona’s Senate Seat Once More

Blake Masters speaking with attendees at the 2022 AmericaFest at the Phoenix Convention Center in Phoenix, Arizona. Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons.

Despite losing to Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly in 2022, Blake Masters plans to run for the United States Senate again.

This time against Kyrsten Sinema.

Confirmation from Masters may come as soon as next week, as Politico reports:

Masters did not reply to a request for comment. Masters won the GOP nomination last year but lost to Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly in a critical swing state.

Former gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake’s advisers say she is expected to announce a Senate campaign in early fall, though some Republicans are skeptical Lake and Masters would run for the same seat. Pinal County sheriff Mark Lamb is another GOP candidate.

Barrett Marson, an Arizona-based GOP strategist, said he talked to Masters a few months ago and he “was pretty decisively in.” However, he said, Masters had been waiting for Lake to decide whether to run.

“I think he is now under the impression that maybe Kari Lake isn’t going to run, because I’ll tell you if Lake and Blake are both in, he is wasting his time,” he said. “They occupy the same lane. They have nearly the same name. And she has much better positive name ID among Republicans than Blake does.”

In March 2022, Masters resigned from Peter Thiel’s firm to run for Senate. Within three months, he secured endorsements from Thiel and former President Donald Trump, leading to a comfortable victory over Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich in the Republican primary.

However, Sen. Kelly defeated Masters by 4.9 percentage points. Kelly enjoyed a massive fundraising advantage, raising $75 million compared to Masters’ $12 million.

On the campaign trail, Kelly utilized the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, Masters’ support for privatizing Social Security, and his flip-flopping on the 2020 presidential election to weaken his support with Republican-leaning voters and moderates.

This article first appeared in American Liberty News.

Amanda Head: Trump Interview Teaser – Tune In!


President Trump’s latest interview will be up soon. Make sure you don’t miss out!

Trump Now Has One Less Primary Rival

Miami Mayor Francis Suarez speaking with attendees at the 2023 Turning Point Action Conference at the Palm Beach County Convention Center in West Palm Beach, Florida. Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Miami Mayor Francis Suarez has dropped out of the Republican presidential primary. The mayor suspended his campaign a week after he failed to qualify for the first Republican presidential debate.

“Running for President of the United States has been one of the greatest honors of my life. This country has given so much to my family and me. The prospect of giving back at the highest levels of public service is a motivator if not a calling,” Suarez said in a statement. “Throughout this process, I have met so many freedom-loving Americans who care deeply about our nation, her people, and its future. It was a privilege to come so close to appearing on stage with the other candidates at last week’s first debate.”

Suarez was the only Hispanic candidate on either side in the race for the White House.

Suarez launched his campaign a little over two months ago, attempting to mimic Ronald Reagan’s big tent policy.


Suarez, a Cuban American, touted his Hispanic heritage and billed himself as a unifier in a politically polarized country. He also ran on his record courting the tech industry to invest in Miami, and leaned into his pro-cryptocurrency views by accepting campaign donations in bitcoin.

“I will continue to amplify the voices of the Hispanic community – the fastest-growing voting group in our country,” Suarez said in Tuesday’s post.

“I look forward to keeping in touch with the other Republican presidential candidates and doing what I can to make sure our party puts forward a strong nominee who can inspire and unify the country, renew Americans’ trust in our institutions and in each other, and win,” he wrote.

Suarez was the third Republican from Florida to run for the 2024 presidential nomination, sharing that trait with Trump and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. But while Trump has loosed a relentless barrage of attacks against the governor, the former president rarely, if ever, mentioned the mayor.

This is a breaking news story. Click refresh for the latest updates.

Amanda Head: Biden’s Lastest Disgusting, Racist Lie


The Biden Presidency has been built on lies, but have you heard his latest one?

Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.

Amanda Head: They Are Already Trying 2024!


Is this the “election variant”? See what Amanda has to say below!

Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.

Is Vivek Ramaswamy The GOP’s New Trump ‘Lite’?

Vivek Ramaswamy speaking with attendees at the 2022 AmericaFest at the Phoenix Convention Center in Phoenix, Arizona.

ANALYSIS- Who is this skinny guy with the funny-sounding name? (That was his opening line at the debate). Vivek Ramaswamy wasn’t supposed to be at the center of the first Republican presidential candidate debate in Milwaukee.

Ron DeSantis was supposed to be the viable GOP alternative to Donald Trump. A two-term governor of the third most populous state in the union, DeSantis, a Navy veteran who served in Iraq, is as conservative as they come.

And he has a proven track record of fighting the left in Florida – and winning.

But despite his solid bona fides and resume, DeSantis has a personality problem. He just doesn’t exude charm or confidence, and that’s hurting him – a lot.

Meanwhile, Ramaswamy the 38-year-old Trump-defending, Cincinnati-born, biotech billionaire (worth at least $950 million), son of Pakistani immigrants, kind of stole the show at the debate.

According to former FBI agent and body language expert, Joe Navarro: “[Ramaswamy] consistently looked the most comfortable on stage.”

He was also the most openly and unabashedly pro-Trump. He was the first candidate to raise their hand when asked who would support the former President as the party nominee even if he is convicted on felony charges that he’s facing.

He has also promised to pardon Trump if elected. But he went even farther than that.

“President Trump, I believe, was the best president of the 21st century,” Ramaswamy said in a clip from the debate Trump posted on Truth Social.

And Trump loved it.

“This answer gave Vivek Ramaswamy a big WIN in the debate because of a thing called TRUTH. Thank you, Vivek!”

The ever-smiling political newbie Ramaswamy, who seemed to be having a blast on stage, was also the target of many of his GOP rivals.

As TIME reported:

Maybe it was Ramaswamy’s consistent and confounding defense of All Things Trump. Maybe it was his smooth talk and culture-war acumen. Maybe it was just the fact that Ramaswamy frankly does not care how things were done before and might just have enough self-made money to go the distance.

Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie snarled that he had “had enough already tonight of a guy who sounds like ChatGPT,” an A.I. battery. He then dismissed Ramaswamy as someone on the same level as a political figure universally loathed in the GOP. “The last person in one of these debates… who stood in the middle of the stage and said, ‘What is a skinny guy with an odd last name doing up here?’ was Barack Obama. And I am afraid we are dealing with the same type of amateur standing on the stage tonight,” Christie said.

But the quick witted Ramaswamy’s riposte to Christie was a zinger: “Give me a hug like you did to Obama, and you’ll help elect me just like you did to Obama. Give me the damn hug, brother.”

Ramaswamy was referring to the 2012 incident when Christie was accused of “hugging” Obama during his visit in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy which hit days before the 2012 presidential election.

It’s a claim that Christie has been denying since then, saying: “I didn’t hug him.”

Photos at the time seem to back up Christie, but the zinger still worked.

Former U.S. Ambassador to the UN under Trump, and ex-South Carolina governor, Nikki Haley, who is of Indian descent, hit Ramaswamy too: “You have no foreign policy experience, and it shows.”

I would agree with that assessment and believe he has made a few deeply flawed important national security statements – including on Ukraine and Israel.

But he is super smart and can learn quickly.

Then Vice President Mike Pence took a Christie-like jab at Ramaswamy, attacking the very same quality that originally helped raise Trump in the GOP base – that he is not a politician.

“Now it’s not the time for on-the-job training,” retorted Pence. “We don’t need to bring in a rookie. We don’t need to bring in people with no experience.”

AS TIME noted: “Attacks during debates are the norm but this was different. Ramaswamy’s competitors really don’t like him. Not even a little.”

However, there is one important GOP rival who seems to like Ramaswamy – Donald Trump. And that could be all that matters.

Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.

Tucker, Elon Real Winners Of First GOP Debate Night

Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr
The true winners of last night’s debate are former prime-time Fox News host Tucker Carlson and Elon Musk, owner of X – formerly Twitter. If you’ve spent the last 24-48 hours under a rock – here’s what transpired last night. Eight Republican candidates running to be the next President of the United States took the stage in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, to talk about their visions for the future of America – and how they are the proper alternatives not only to the babbling buffoon currently in the White House Joe Biden, but also to America’s 45th President Donald Trump – now running for the office for a third time. The Wisconsin event was moderated, albeit poorly, by Fox News anchors Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum. Of course, the debate in itself was probably somewhat staged. According to multiple reports, the candidates and their prep camps were given the questions in advance. While the debate was going on in Milwaukee, Tucker Carlson aired an opposing pre-recorded interview with America’s 45th President Donald Trump, who himself is set to be arraigned in a Fulton County, Georgia court on Thursday where he is expected to front up a bail payment of $200,000. (RELATED: Trump Agrees To Release Conditions, Including $200,000 Bond) Tucker Carlson has enacted fully-fledged revenge on his former employer and put millions of dollars in the pockets of a new corporate overlord, Elon Musk. X, formerly Twitter, has been working to position itself as the preeminent alternative to the mainstream media since the Musk buyout earlier this year. By the view numbers still rolling in on the video posted last night, they seem to have succeeded in doing that to a level even Musk himself may have never imagined. As of the writing of this piece, Tucker’s 46-minute long X video has been viewed over 186.4 million times. Mediaite noted the following in a piece published yesterday:
“The interview, which was taped this week and is dropping to coincide with the debate, is intended as additional salt in the wound for Fox executives wary that a Trump-less event will not bring in the major ratings typically expected from these kinds of nights.”
Notably, video-sharing platform Rumble which was the the first place to try and pitch itself as the free speech alternative to YouTube partnered with the RNC and probably boosted their own profits last night as well. The Rumble stream of the debate from the GOP’s channel has amassed 1.54 million views. Definitely a respectable number, but making up less than 1% of the views amassed by Carlson on X. For the record the Rumble stream via Roku is how I personally watched the debate, refusing to give my dollars to the Fox News machine. Fox News has yet to officially release numbers on last night’s debate but here are some viewership numbers reported by Mediaite from past presidential debates:
“In 2015, Fox’s primary debate – with Trump and nine other candidates – drew 24 million viewers, smashing previous records and earning the distinction of being one of the most-watched cable programs ever. Overall, 2016 was a blockbuster year for debate ratings: the 12 Republican primary events averaged 15 million viewers.”
Even if Fox’s numbers last night were close to their past viewership – which they are not expected to be without Trump – Carlson’s X video dwarfed those numbers as well. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk. This piece is republished with permission from American Liberty News.

‘Trump Was 100% Right Not To Debate:’ Don Jr. Slams Fox News’ ‘Un-American’ Decision

Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

Donald Trump Jr. and his fiancée, Kimberly Guilfoyle, expressed their clear displeasure with Fox News Wednesday evening.

In a video clip that’s since gone viral, observers can see the younger Trump at last night’s debate, castigating Fox News for its decision to restrict Trump surrogates trying to access the media spin room.

Fox justified the decision by stating that since the former president declined to debate, his team was not allowed to enter the spin room. Trump publicly snubbed Fox by appearing on Tucker Carlson’s Twitter/X show instead of attending the debate.

However, there was confusion about who could go backstage and how Trump allies might be permitted entry.

The New York Post has more:

“I’d been told by others that I would be able to go in,” Trump Jr. told reporters after a Fiserv Forum security guard turned him away. “Fox won’t let me into the spin room. They’re telling him, he works for security here, but they’re telling him that I’m not allowed to go in there.”

“Because the candidates that they’ve been boosting while trying to cut down Trump for the last, what, two years didn’t perform as they had hoped,” he went on. “So they can’t have someone who can maybe be a representative of my father.”

In political parlance, the “spin room” refers to the area where candidates and their surrogates gather after each debate to talk up their performance to the media while tearing down their rivals.

Fox News co-hosted the debate with the Republican National Committee, which set donor and polling requirements for the candidates and also asked each to sign a pledge to support the party’s eventual nominee.

Besides Trump, Fox banned surrogates for candidates who didn’t qualify for the debate.