In a recent development, it has been reported that a total of 16 legal actions have been filed to prevent former President Donald Trump from appearing on state ballots in the 2024 presidential election. These actions were filed by various individuals and organizations who have expressed concerns regarding Trump's potential candidacy. Notably, one of the commentators on this matter is Jonathan Turley, a law professor and news contributor.
Turley points out that these comments come from a former conservative judge on the fourth circuit court of appeals, lending credibility to the concerns raised. He acknowledges that in the current politically charged climate, exaggerated claims are not uncommon. For instance, there have been instances where members of Congress have stated that hate speech is not protected by the First Amendment, which Turley clarifies is not the case. While hate crimes are not protected, hate speech falls under the umbrella of free speech, even if it is condemned as hateful.
Turley also highlights that this is not a new phenomenon, with some Democrats openly campaigning on the promise of censorship. This raises concerns as these individuals are essentially pledging to curtail citizens' constitutional rights if elected. Turley emphasizes the importance of defending the First Amendment, even for speech we may disagree with, as it is what defines the United States.
The professor further explains that panic seems to have set in among those opposing Trump, leading them to resort to extreme measures. Accusations comparing Trump to historical dictators like Hitler or Stalin have been thrown around, but Turley argues that the same accusations are now being turned against those who don't trust the voters and attempt to prevent Trump's inclusion on the ballot.
Turley also points out that even within the ranks of the Democratic party, there is disagreement regarding these legal actions. Not all members are in support of preventing Trump from running for president. Despite the perceived unity in some quarters, Turley warns against the false narratives being propagated, particularly on certain media networks. He urges viewers to question such claims and consider the broader implications for democracy.
Regarding another pressing matter related to Trump, there has been a plea from special prosecutor Jack Smith to the Supreme Court, urging immediate action on considering Trump's immunity argument. Smith argues that the resolution of this argument is pivotal to determining whether the former president should stand trial. Smith claims the charges against Trump are of grave importance and asserts that a prompt decision is in the public interest.
Turley speculates on whether the Supreme Court will share the urgency expressed by Smith. He questions the need to rush the trial before the upcoming election, as even a conviction would not disqualify Trump from running or serving as president. This approach also contradicts the Department of Justice's historical aversion to trials coinciding with elections.
As the legal battles unfold and the Supreme Court weighs its decision, the nation awaits a resolution on Trump's potential inclusion on state ballots for the upcoming presidential race.
