'Madness': Critics blast SCOTUS’ decision to bar NM official — but not Trump — from office over Jan 6
After the US Supreme Court on Monday rejected a New Mexico man's conviction appeal in his efforts to run for state office over his participation in the January 6 attack on the US Capitol, social media had plenty to say to the Republican-majority high court.
According to The New Republic, ex-New Mexico official Couy Griffin "was convicted on misdemeanor offenses for his role in the" insurrection, "ultimately costing him his job as county commissioner."
Noting that Griffin is founder of "Cowboys for Trump," NBC News reports, "The lawsuit brought against him by New Mexico residents cited the same constitutional provision that [former President Donald] Trump successfully argued in a separate case could not be used to throw him off the ballot in Colorado."
The news outlet notes, "But when the Supreme Court ruled for Trump in that case March 4, it made it clear that the ruling only applied to those running for federal office."
The high court wrote in the decision regarding Trump's case, "We conclude that states may disqualify persons holding or attempting to hold state office. But states have no power under the Constitution to enforce Section 3 with respect to federal offices, especially the presidency."
Griffin responded to the Supreme Court's ruling against him via X/Twitter, writing, "I just found out (through the media) that my appeal to the SCOTUS has been denied. Very disappointed. I don’t even know what to say. But I thank you for your prayers and for standing with me through this."
Several journalists, legal and political experts did not mince words in their reactions to the ruling.
READ MORE: 'Constitutionally unforgivable': Ex-federal judge rips SCOTUS’ Trump disqualification ruling
Former MSNBC host Mehdi Hasan wrote, "Madness. One rule for Trump, one rule for everyone else. "Our Supreme Court, ladies and gents."
A couple of legal experts noted that SCOTUS stayed true to their ruling in favor of Trump by barring state officials who participate in an insurrection from office — not federal officials.
MSNBC host Katie Phang said, "Well, at least SCOTUS is consistent."
University of Maine Professor Emerita Amy Fried added, "Per the Supreme Court, states can apply the disqualification clause of the 14th Amendment to keep state and local candidates off the ballot (but not presidential candidates). NM did so and so might other states."
READ MORE: How SCOTUS election ruling exposes 'originalism' as the 'fraud it actually is': analysis
Conservative lawyer and analyst George Conway wrote, "But under 𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 𝘷. 𝘈𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘰𝘯, this adjudicated insurrectionist remains free to run for a federal House or Senate seat—or even for the presidency!! Great job, SCOTUS!!"
Democratic strategist Adam said, "He should have legally changed his name to Trump before filing that one."
