Clearing the Legal Hurdles: How Trump Can Reach the Supreme Court


Transcript from Mark Levin video:

The federal government is being affected by a federal election, a presidential election. The entire campaign law process at the federal level is now influenced by this one court and this one state. We need to address this issue, and there’s only one institution with the power to do that: the United States Supreme Court. This is the court that, if you can get your case to it and find a procedural pathway, has the national authority over a presidential election if the Constitution is violated.

You might wonder, has the Supreme Court ever intervened in a federal election when it believed the Constitution was violated? Yes, it has, in Bush v. Gore almost 24 years ago. If you read that decision, there were split decisions, but seven justices voted on the application of the Equal Protection Clause. So, what is the pathway here? My argument is that there is a violation of due process under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. If you have been watching Fox or listening to me for six weeks, you know there are countless examples of due process violations. They are almost impossible to compile; they feel infinite.

What was the point of all these due process violations? To influence the election. How? By getting a guilty verdict. So, while you are trying to overturn that guilty verdict in one lane, you are also trying to create steps to the Supreme Court in another lane and figure out what arguments might persuade them, even if you have only a 10% chance. We want to stay as close as possible to Bush v. Gore, even though there are some differences, but the similarities are what you emphasize.

Firstly, you have a situation where a state prosecutor and a judge are seizing federal jurisdictional authority in a federal campaign, and not just any federal campaign—the most important one, the campaign for President of the United States. That’s number one. Number two, you have myriad Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment due process violations against the Republican nominee, the former president, affecting the ability of the Republican Party, its members, donors, and the candidate himself to participate as equal participants in a presidential election.

The due process violations also affect you and me. When the candidate is unable to participate normally in a presidential campaign, it affects the voter. We don’t have access to the candidate; we can’t hear from them or meet them, which might influence our decision to support them. The fact is that the campaign is handicapped. Poll numbers going up are irrelevant; that’s just a snapshot. The end result is unknown, but we do know that one campaign can campaign unfettered while the other is shackled, at least for six weeks, and that judge is not done. Depending on the appellate courts in New York, he might issue a sentencing, which is problematic. The problem is that they’ve created a scarlet letter for the candidate, which his opponent will use throughout the election.

This doesn’t help Donald Trump in the long run. He wouldn’t have gone through this if he had a choice. He has explained that this is corrupt and it’s affecting his campaign. As an advocate, you’re trying to get to the Supreme Court with due process issues and interference in a presidential election. You want to use the precedent from Bush v. Gore, where the Supreme Court intervened because it was a presidential election.

How do you get to the Supreme Court? You can follow New York’s rules and the federal process, but you can’t wait for the entire appeal process in New York because the purpose of this case is to interfere with the election. So, you can file a writ of certiorari to ask the Supreme Court to intervene. However, the state court is not done, and there is no federal statute providing a path to the Supreme Court.

There is another way: a common law writ, which goes back to British common law. It allows justices to take up cases with significant issues, and this case triggers virtually every issue that could make its way to the Supreme Court. The issue now is to get out of the New York system and bring the case to the Supreme Court. This situation is even more critical than Bush v. Gore because it involves a state court seizing federal jurisdictional authority over a federal presidential election.

To proceed, you would file an emergency notice of appeal, seek an expedited or emergency review from the New York appellate court, and then file applications for the common law writ with the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing that the harm is immediate and ongoing. The Supreme Court could take action if it chooses, addressing the federalization of what took place in the Manhattan court and the precedent it might create if left unchecked.

Ultimately, this is a significant case for the Supreme Court to examine. The federal government is being affected by this one court and state, and only the United States Supreme Court has the power to address this issue. We are in this situation because of the Democratic Party’s actions, which have fundamentally transformed America’s legal system into a corrupt one. The justice system is being destroyed by the destruction of the legal system. This case presents compelling reasons for the Supreme Court to intervene and address these issues now.

5 1 vote
Article Rating
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The democrats have jumped the shark on this one. The USSC does need to intervene and shut down this travesty of justice.

The Supreme Court needs to address these egregious assaults on our elections, the Constitution and the justice system ASAP. Also, the Justices need to keep in mind the ongoing assault pushed by the left on the independence, integrity and function of the Supreme Court itself. It is all related.

Trump’s “conviction” needs to be immediately reversed.

Do they not have the right to oppose whatever they want to oppose?

Do they have any right to impose their religious views on others?

And how, exactly, are they doing that?