Laurence Tribe - The Equal Rights Amendment at Long Last

[Wiz Imp]

29. Not quite what you're making it out to be.

The liberal justices decision was on very narrow grounds. In general they agreed with Tribe's position.

https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/supreme-court-trump-colorado-ruling-election/

Worse yet, the court’s conservative majority went even further, dramatically narrowing the utility of the amendment for holding insurrectionists to account. That led Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson to warn that the ruling went so far beyond the specifics of the Colorado case that it could foreclose future efforts to impose accountability on insurrectionists. “The Court continues on to resolve questions not before us. In a case involving no federal action whatsoever, the Court opines on how federal enforcement of Section 3 must proceed,” Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson wrote. ‘“These musings are as inadequately supported as they are gratuitous.”

Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote a separate concurrence that essentially agreed with the liberals but suggested they were too urgent in expressing their concerns.

Not exactly unanimity in opinion there when even Barret mostly agrees with the liberals.

Also, you said "I remember when he said that the SC would uphold the Colorado ban; before it was overturned 9-0". He never said that. He said they should uphold it not that they would.

Tribe said "Do I think the Supreme Court will be affected by pure politics or by the threatened violence Trump keeps talking about if he is kept off the ballot? Your guess is as good as mine. But if they want to be faithful to their oath — and this case is ultimately about being faithful to the oath to support the Constitution — they will have to set those things aside."

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2023/12/no-easy-exit-ramp-for-scotus-on-trump-harvard-scholar-says/