By Nick Catoggio
Thursday, February 08, 2024
The
fecklessness and civic corruption of congressional Republicans is an almost inexhaustible
topic. But after writing about it for three straight days,
I confess to a degree of exhaustion.
So
let’s keep it light and breezy today by imagining that the Supreme Court
disqualifies Donald Trump from being president again.
Earlier
today, the court heard
arguments on whether Section
3 of the 14th Amendment bars Trump from office due to his
insurrectionary behavior on January 6. Many brilliant and learned legal minds,
including our own Sarah Isgur, have weighed the constitutional merits of the
case and ended up on opposite sides. Court
challenges to Trump’s eligibility have succeeded in two states and
been dismissed in several others. It’s a matter of fascinating academic debate.
And
it’s all noise. Trump will not be disqualified. What I wrote in
December is truer today following his victories in Iowa and New
Hampshire: The Supreme Court won’t trigger the gravest crisis of government
legitimacy since the Civil War by kicking the presumptive Republican nominee
off the ballot nine months before Election Day.
Whether
it should makes for a fine watercooler conversation in the
local law school faculty lounge. Whether it’s ever proper for a court to let
political considerations influence its jurisprudence is heady stuff for a
colloquy among legal theorists. But the result of the case is not in doubt.
Trump will win, probably with at least one vote in his favor from the liberal
justices. Any suspense about the outcome has to do with how close to a 9-0
ruling John Roberts can get.
Which
is a bummer, and for more than one reason. There’s no news development less
inspiring for a pundit to write about than “Status quo prevails.”
Let’s
pretend, then. Let’s imagine that, against all odds, five votes materialize on
the court for disqualifying Trump. The three liberals somehow persuade Brett
Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett to pull the plug on the man who appointed them.
(Normally Roberts would be the first target for a crossover vote, but the chief
is famously an institutionalist. He won’t compromise public respect for his
court by moving to oust Trump.) Americans wake up one day this spring to find
that the odds-on
favorite to become the next president has been excommunicated from
politics. What happens then?
A
lot of stuff happens then, and none of it is good. Today won’t be so light and
breezy after all.
***
There
are many moving parts in the disqualification scenario. Let’s tick through them
one by one.
I.
Trump.
No
one is more dangerous than a sociopath with nothing to lose. And if SCOTUS
disqualifies him, Trump would lose more than just his career.
Part
of the reason he’s running for president again is to grant himself a “get out
of jail free” card. If he wins reelection, he’ll have the federal criminal
cases against him dismissed and will move to have the criminal cases against
him in New York and Georgia suspended, alleging that to proceed would make it
impossible for him to carry out his duties as president. He’ll win that
argument.
If
he’s disqualified from office, all of that goes up in smoke. The power to spare
himself from prison would be yanked from his grasp.
He
won’t react well. Trump is a manchild so obsessively vindictive that the
actual theme of his presidential campaign is
“retribution.” If he’s kicked off the ballot, retribution will consume
whatever’s left of his rational mind. He’ll want to see the country burn for
having thwarted him, just as he wanted
to see his vice president hanged on January 6 for doing so.
And
there’ll be nothing to restrain his most destructive impulses this time—no
prospect of holding future office that might encourage him to play nice and
certainly no altruistic concern about sparing America from civil unrest. Any
fear of being prosecuted for incitement to violence might also evaporate as it
dawns on him that he’s likely to face prison anyway from one of the other
pending prosecutions.
Even
if he doesn’t explicitly ask his diehards to riot, some will oblige him.
There’s no harsher indictment of the state of the right than the fact that it’s
all but universally assumed that grassroots Republicans will begin breaking
things if their hero is held legally accountable for the coup he tried to
stage.
Violence
will be one part of Trump’s response, but there are others.
His
political goal, short of maximizing the chaos inflicted on a constitutional
order that defied him, will be to delegitimize the coming election. Naturally,
he’ll ask his fans not to vote in November; the whole point of the “Republican
hostage crisis” since 2016 is to teach conservatives that they can’t
and won’t win elections unless he’s in charge. Being thrown off the ballot by
SCOTUS will require Trump and his supporters to prove they’re willing to
finally shoot the hostage.
In
fact, I’d expect him to demand that the Republican Party protest the court’s
ruling by refusing to choose a replacement nominee. The last thing he would
want to come from all this is his substitute on the ballot defeating Biden and
becoming the new locus of power in the GOP. Yes, granted, Republican victory in
November would guarantee Trump a criminal pardon, but at what price? He’d have
lost his crown. For a narcissist, that’s a fate worse than death.
His
movement is a cult, and you know how
cults tend to end. The Jim Jones of the GOP would doubtless prefer to see
Joe Biden win handily in an election that will forever carry an asterisk due to
a widespread boycott by Republican voters than to see Ron DeSantis usurp him.
Trump has spent four years claiming that the president didn’t win his first
term fair and square; he’ll be quite comfortable spending the next four the
same way.
II.
Legislatures.
It’s
almost too obvious to mention, but here it is: Trump being disqualified from
the ballot on “insurrection” grounds would instantly trigger an effort in red
states to disqualify Joe Biden for the same reason.
Forever
desperate to ingratiate himself to populists, the always thirsty DeSantis has
already floated the possibility. “Could we just say Biden can’t be on the
ballot because he let in eight million illegals into the country and violated
the Constitution, which he has?” the governor wondered in
December. Retribution and delegitimization—that would be the essence of Trump’s
response to being struck from the ballot and so it would also be the essence of
the response among state-level GOP apparatchiks.
We
might even hear semi-serious chatter in red-state legislatures about seceding,
reasoning that a country that would bar its people from electing a candidate
whom a near-majority supports is no longer meaningfully a democracy.
Opportunistic Republican officials would flog it ceaselessly, angling to one-up
each other in the endless game of “who’s most theatrically outraged at the
libs?” that ambitious right-wing politicians play to build a national
profile.
Propelled
by that dynamic, and egged on by Trump, there’s no telling how much steam the
secession push might build.
Meanwhile,
Republicans in Congress would be looking to leverage the text of the 14th
Amendment. Section 3 provides that a candidate for office who’s
disqualified due to insurrection can be reinstated if two-thirds of the House
and the Senate agree. “For the sake of civic harmony and public faith in our
democracy, we must reinstate Trump,” congressional Republicans would say,
setting up a win/win for them. Either Democrats will agree and join the GOP in
restoring Trump to the ballot or they’ll refuse, shifting the focus of
right-wing anger over Trump’s disqualification from a relatively sterile
political target like the Supreme Court to a much juicier one, the Democratic
Party.
What
would congressional Democrats do?
A few
would say “you’re right” and reluctantly support the Republican effort
for the good of the country, I suspect. But most would decline. They won’t want
to absolve a repulsive demagogue from the legal consequences of his coup
attempt, and they surely won’t want to face the wrath of Trump-hating
Democratic voters demanding that they not rescue an authoritarian at the very
moment the country finally seems to be rid of him.
Even
the cynical argument that Democrats should want to face Trump
in the general election because he’s the weakest potential nominee wouldn’t
move them. For one thing, the likelihood of multiple
constitutional crises in his second term has hopefully scared liberals
straight about wishing to see him back on the ballot. For another, to the
extent Trump was ever a pushover in November, he
no longer is. If anything, the prospect of a MAGA boycott of a Trump-less
election would arguably ensure a Democratic win. He’s the weakest potential
Republican nominee if and only if GOP voters turn out at the same rate
for all potential Republican nominees. But they assuredly will not.
So
congressional Democrats would block the Republican effort to reinstate Trump.
And the American right, which already perceives his legal ordeal as little more
than a left-wing ploy to rig democracy in their favor, will feel confirmed in
its suspicions.
III.
The Republican Party.
The
leadership of the GOP will face two impossible choices after Trump is
disqualified. Do they dare nominate a replacement? If so, who?
It
seems preposterous that one of America’s major parties might choose not to
offer a candidate for president, but the reality of the party’s long-running
hostage crisis argues in favor of it. The calculus for the Republican National
Committee and other leaders would be this: If it defies Trump’s wishes (unlikely!)
by nominating Nikki Haley or Ron DeSantis instead, will it alienate his
populist base so enduringly that it ends up losing multiple elections
because of it?
Forfeiting
2024 is crazy … unless refusing to forfeit leads to losing in 2024 and 2028 and
2032 and so on.
Besides,
leaving Trump on the ballot even though he’s ineligible to serve could work out
for them. He might get more electoral votes than Biden anyway, which would mean
either Trump’s Republican vice president takes power next year or Joe Biden
suffers the ultimate crisis of legitimacy by serving a second term despite
having lost the election. I say “either” because no one knows how the law would
work in this circumstance. Such absurd questions are yet another perverse civic
bequest of the Republican electorate’s absurd fascination with an absurd
person.
Let’s
say the RNC decides that the party must have an option on the ballot, though.
“America can’t survive another term of Joe Biden, we need to win the White
House to exact revenge on the courts and on Democrats for cruelly striking
Trump from the ballot,” yadda yadda. Who should be the nominee?
Nikki
Haley? She’s guaranteed to finish with the second-most delegates of any primary
candidate, but a refugee from the pre-Trump GOP establishment seems singularly
ill-suited to unite a party furious at Trump’s disqualification from the
ballot. She’s the candidate of college graduates in
a movement dominated by working-class populists. Her popularity
has slipped since becoming Trump’s last obstacle to the nomination
too, enough so that she got crushed a few days ago in Nevada’s primary by
“none of the above.” Replacing Trump with Haley would lead the Steve
Bannons of the world to howl that the substitution amounts to nothing less than
a “uniparty” coup.
Ron
DeSantis, then? The governor of Florida may be the Republican best positioned
on paper to unite a fracturing coalition of populists and conservatives. But he
ran a terrible campaign distinguished by infighting and wasteful
spending and arguably underperformed expectations more pitifully than
any candidate in modern political history. Despite claiming to have been more
electable than Trump, by the end of his run he performed worse
against Biden head-to-head than
Trump does and considerably worse than
Haley does.
It’s
not clear to me that he’d even accept the GOP nomination if a disqualified
Trump insisted that the party not replace him on the ballot. DeSantis is a
young man whose future has already been damaged by challenging Trump this
cycle. Why would he damage that future further by agreeing to fill in as
nominee, only to lose the general election badly anyway when you-know-who
demands that his supporters not turn out to support a “traitor”?
It
may be that GOP chieftains would conclude that their one plausible option to
replace Trump is Donald Trump Jr. (They wouldn’t even need to change the name
on the ballot!) Only someone from within the family, of the royal bloodline,
might prove acceptable enough to the king to dissuade him from commanding his
populist troops to shoot the Republican hostage in November.
IV.
Joe Biden and the Democratic Party.
The
president would face an immediate conundrum after Trump’s abrupt court-ordered
exit from the race. Is there anything he could do to try to calm the country,
especially the American right?
He
could pardon Trump as a gesture of goodwill. But if he does that, suspicions
that the federal cases against him were mere political ploys would deepen. Why
was a pardon warranted the moment Trump was no longer a candidate for office
and not before?
Democrats
would face their own crisis following Trump’s disqualification. Namely, do they
want to stick with a nominee who can’t
remember when his son passed away and keeps recounting recent
conversations he’s had with foreign
leaders who died years ago?
The
argument for renominating Joe Biden in 2024 has always been shaky, but there’s
logic to it. He defeated Trump once before, after all. And the advantage of
incumbency is no small thing to concede when the other guy on the ballot is an
authoritarian scheming for
ways to consolidate
power once he’s elected. The risk of a second Trump term is already
unacceptably high; ushering a sitting president toward the exit in the idle
hope that Kamala Harris or Gavin Newsom would do better in November makes it
that much higher.
But
if the Supreme Court were to suddenly eliminate that risk, the calculus would
change. Running Gavin Newsom is less existentially risky when the alternative
is President Nikki Haley, not President Donald Trump.
The
question is what Biden’s polling might look like after Trump’s
disqualification. It’s such a black box that I think one can plausibly argue
that his chances at reelection would soar—or crumble.
The
“soar” scenario is straightforward. After Trump orders his supporters to
boycott the election in protest, support for the Republican Party’s new nominee
(assuming there is one) collapses. Millions of right-wing populists resolve to
either stay home or to divert their votes toward writing in Trump; meanwhile,
violence committed by rogue Trump supporters drives a backlash toward the
president among frightened undecideds. Biden quickly opens a double-digit lead
over his new GOP opponent and never looks back.
But
the “crumble” scenario is also easy to imagine. First, swing voters angry at
seeing a major candidate lawfare-d off the ballot in the thick of a campaign
shift to the GOP. So do the so-called “double
haters” who dislike both Biden and Trump; with the latter no longer a
candidate, they start to view the election as a pure referendum on the
president and swing toward the right decisively. Then populist Republicans who
were swayed initially by Trump’s pleas to boycott the race begin to have
misgivings, irritated by the thought of handing Biden a second term on a silver
platter simply to spite the Supreme Court. Grudgingly, they too begin to back
the new GOP nominee.
The coup
de grace comes when progressives disgusted with Biden over the war in
Gaza and numerous other minor ideological betrayals desert him en masse, no
longer driven by the specter of Trump on the ballot to hold their noses and
vote for their party’s nominee.
As
Biden’s polling tanks, anxious Democratic leaders are left wondering whether an
eleventh-hour replacement as nominee wouldn’t be the most judicious move. A
pressure campaign at the top quietly begins to convince him to step aside,
driven by the reassurance that Trump won’t be president again if he does.
Before
you know it, a campaign between two men whom most of the country dislikes will
have transformed into a campaign between Kamala Harris and Nikki Haley. Two
women whom, er, most of the country dislikes.
***
The
bottom line on Trump being disqualified is that it would instantly become
impossible for the outcome of the election to be seen as legitimate, regardless
of who won.
If
Democrats defeated a Trump-less GOP, Republicans would insist that their chosen
nominee would have prevailed. If a Trump-less GOP defeated the Democrats,
liberals would insist that they would have prevailed over a weakened, legally
compromised Trump.
Of
course, the outcome of the election won’t be seen as legitimate if Trump isn’t disqualified
either. If he runs and loses, Republicans will claim that years of lawfare
unfairly undermined his campaign. If he runs and wins, Democrats will claim
that he should have been deemed ineligible under the 14th Amendment to begin
with.
There’s
no truly good scenario, but there never is anymore. A politics deformed by
corruption and authoritarianism, and then by hamfisted institutional attempts
to restrain it, is a politics where all possible outcomes are merely different
shades of bad. It’s very
third-world.
But
it’s also academic. As I say, the Supreme Court won’t disqualify Trump. The
particular form of illegitimacy produced by the election will be one in which
he remains a participant. Lucky us.
No comments:
Post a Comment