Supreme Court gets stern warning to butt out of Trump ballot challenges

The Supreme Court has the right and ability to not wade in on the disputes in multiple states considering banning Donald Trump from the 2024 ballot and they should take advantage of it.

That is the opinion of attorney Shan Wu in a column for the Daily Beast where he said the system is working as long as officials at the state level are adhering to the distinctive laws that are applicable in their respective states while also applying the 14th Amendment as it is written

According to the legal analyst, the system is working as it should and there is no reason for the nation's highest court to step in, reminding them that this is what "federalism" looks like.

As he wrote, "The U.S. Supreme Court needs to understand that the disqualification of former President Donald J. Trump under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment from running again for President of the United States is going exactly as it should."

Explaining, "states have primary power over administering federal elections with Congress also possessing authority to regulate how the elections are run," he added that "the fact that who can run, who can vote and the 'time place and manner' in which voting takes place varies from state to state is normal—and, arguably, the high court need not concern itself with these issues."

With that in mind, he warned the justices it would be better to not interfere and put themselves in a highly political position that would further erode the court's reputation.

Saying there is "nothing wrong" with what is playing out at the state level, he suggested, "SCOTUS does not have to take the ultimate appeal of any of these cases. Its discretion to take cases is complete, and letting the different cases stand would be an unreviewable decision on their part that would both keep them out of a repeat of their gross interference in the 2000 presidential election where the high court, not the people, made George W. Bush the 43rd President, and perhaps staunch the bleed out of their credibility."

You can read more here.