The Excerpt podcast: The Supreme Court hears arguments over Trump ballot questions
On today's episode of The Excerpt podcast: The Supreme Court hears arguments in the case that might decide whether Donald Trump can stay on certain ballots. Donald Trump picks up two more caucus wins. The Senate advances aid for Ukraine and Israel. President Joe Biden is accused of having a 'poor memory' by his own Justice Department. Advocates go hyper-local with the abortion rights fight.
Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it. This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text.
Podcasts: True crime, in-depth interviews and more Paste BN podcasts right here
Taylor Wilson:
Good morning. I'm Taylor Wilson, and today is Friday, February 9th, 2024. This is The Excerpt.
Today, a look at the Supreme Court arguments over Donald Trump's ballot questions. Plus, Trump picks up two more caucus victories, and the president is criticized for his handling of classified documents but won't face charges.
♦
But first, we start with a major Supreme Court hearing dealing with whether to leave former President Donald Trump on the ballot in Colorado. Justices heard oral arguments yesterday. I spoke with USA Today reporter, Maureen Groppe, about what all this means for states trying to keep Trump off the 2024 ballot. Maureen, thanks for hopping on The Excerpt today.
Maureen Groppe:
Happy to be here.
Taylor Wilson:
So the Supreme Court heard oral arguments yesterday surrounding this Trump ballot question. Can you remind us what exactly is at issue here?
Maureen Groppe:
What the court is deciding is whether Colorado was correct when it said that Trump was disqualified from appearing on the primary ballot in Colorado because of an anti-insurrectionist provision of the Constitution. That amendment to the Constitution was added after the Civil War to keep rebels, to keep insurrectionists, who had previously sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution from then returning to office.
Taylor Wilson:
And what did justices focus their questions and attention on yesterday?
Maureen Groppe:
There could have been a lot of focus on the exact wording of this amendment and what the authors of the amendment intended and how to apply it, and there was a little bit of that. But there was a lot more of the justices looking at the practical effects of what would happen if they let Colorado's decision stand. Then other states might do something similar, or some states might say, "Well, we can come up with reasons why they would call President Biden an insurrectionist and take him off the ballot." They didn't like the idea that there'd be sort of this mismatch around the country of some ballots have the leading candidates on it and some do not.
Taylor Wilson:
How did Donald Trump himself spend the day? Have we heard from him since these arguments were held?
Maureen Groppe:
He was not at the court. There was a lot of interest in whether he was going to be there because in his many court appearances and the different civil and criminal cases that he's facing, he's sometimes made comments, spoken out, had a significant presence at those court proceedings, but he was not there. He stayed in Florida earlier and then he had a political event in Nevada in the evening. So he was listening from afar, but he was not there.
Taylor Wilson:
And Maureen, what's next for these Trump ballot questions going forward?
Maureen Groppe:
We have to see what the court does, of course. If they decide this case in the favor of the Colorado challengers, then Trump would not be on the ballot in Colorado. And other states could take similar actions, depending on their own state election rules about ballots. If the court sides against the challengers, it depends on the way that they do it. There's a way that they could do it that would stop these challenges in Colorado and elsewhere around the country.
Taylor Wilson:
All right, Maureen Groppe, great insight as always. Thanks so much.
Maureen Groppe:
Thank you.
♦
Taylor Wilson:
It was a predictable victory for Donald Trump last night in the U.S. Virgin Islands and in the state of Nevada where the Republican Party held two confusing and separate elections this week. Trump was the clear victor in yesterday's caucuses, but his only remaining Republican rival, Nikki Haley, instead opted to participate in Tuesday's primary vote where more voters opted to check the box for "None of these candidates," than they did for Haley. Haley has vowed she's staying in the race until at least Super Tuesday. She announced several campaign and supporter events yesterday, even as it became clear she would not be victorious at the polls. Both Trump and Haley now turn their attention to South Carolina where they'll both campaign this weekend. Haley will be on a bus tour of the state and Trump has a rally tomorrow at Coastal Carolina University.
♦
After a similar vote failed earlier this week, 17 Republican senators joined Democrats to advance a $95 billion foreign aid package that'll send funding to Ukraine and Israel. The vote came with assurances that there will be a chance to tweak the bill to add new border provisions. The bill would send roughly $60 billion to Ukraine, 14 billion to Israel, and $9 billion in humanitarian aid to Gaza and elsewhere. It also includes about $5 billion for Taiwan. The package still must undergo a final majority vote in the Senate and then pass in the House where its fate remains unclear.
♦
President Joe Biden willfully retained and disclosed highly classified military and foreign policy documents about national security matters. That's what a report released yesterday by the Justice Department found. But the special counsel in charge of the case, Robert Hur, said that no criminal charges will be recommended for Biden. The report is likely to stop Biden from being able to forcefully condemn former President Donald Trump in the run-up to November's presidential election. Trump has been criminally indicted, accused of illegally hoarding classified records at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida.
Special Counsel Hur said that Biden's case was different because his staff took steps to promptly return the documents and cooperated with the investigation. Trump is charged with illegally holding on to documents and then obstructing government efforts to get them back. Trump has said he's done nothing wrong. In deciding not to prosecute Biden, the report says he came across in his interview with investigators as a sympathetic, well-meaning elderly man with poor memory and investigators believe potential jurors would see him that way as well. Biden got defensive about the remark, saying he didn't need the special counsel's advice.
President Biden:
I did not willfully retain these documents. In addition, I know there's some attention paid to some language in the report about my recollection of events. There's even reference that I don't remember when my son died. How in the hell dare he raise that? Frankly, when I was asked the question, I thought to myself, "It wasn't any of their damn business."
Taylor Wilson:
For more, you can read the full story on usatoday.com.
♦
Anti-abortion advocates are taking their activism to the hyper-local level, and because of that could end up bringing the issue back to the Supreme Court. Savannah Kuchar, our Congress and Campaigns reporter, spoke to my colleague, Sara Ganim, about how activists in some cities and towns are turning to local ordinances to advance their cause and the national implications that could have.
Sara Ganim:
Hi, Savannah. Thanks so much for joining me today.
Savannah Kuchar:
Yeah, thanks for having me on.
Sara Ganim:
So since Roe v. Wade was overturned, we've heard a lot of talk about abortion rights moving to a state level, but your reporting is showing that it's even more local than that. Can you tell me about it?
Savannah Kuchar:
Yeah, so what we found is not only is the abortion debate happening at the state level, but it's happening in cities and towns across the country. It's happening in fights at city council meetings, in small towns, and even a couple of big cities. There's a movement to pass these city ordinances, which are essentially local laws trying to ban abortion within city limits. The exact means kind of vary by city, but the most common ways are prohibiting the shipment of abortion drugs or making it illegal or punishable to either perform an abortion on a resident of that town or to aid in the process of an abortion on a resident.
Sara Ganim:
Your article focuses on Texas, is that where a lot of these local anti-abortion statutes are popping up?
Savannah Kuchar:
Yeah. So Texas has been the main area where we see these local ordinances, but now we're starting to see that move out of Texas into some neighboring states and even places like Illinois, especially since the overturning of Roe v. Wade kind of opened that up, that possibility up.
Sara Ganim:
How are advocates for abortion rights responding to this?
Savannah Kuchar:
So they're also pushing back at the local level, going to city council meetings, meeting with local leaders, taking the fight to the community itself. One of the arguments that we hear is, this is an idea being brought in from out of town extremists, and so they feel like this idea is not really for their community. So they're fighting back at that level.
Sara Ganim:
This is such a polarizing topic. I'm guessing that these local laws will be challenged. Will they end up back at the Supreme Court?
Savannah Kuchar:
Possibly. Some people say it's inevitable, and I was told by at least one expert that this is really what the anti-abortion movement actually wants. They want to get it back in front of the Supreme Court, and these local ordinances are actually a means to do that. So even though the laws are local, the backing behind it is federal statutes. And so by doing that, they're setting up the potential for this escalating legal battle that could get abortion back in front of the Supreme Court, and they're really trying to get an enforceable federal ban on the books at the end of the day.
Sara Ganim:
Savannah, thanks so much for taking the time to talk to me about this.
Savannah Kuchar:
Yeah, thanks so much for having me and talking to me about it.
♦
Taylor Wilson:
Not only is it Friday, folks, it's Friday and National Pizza Day, double reason to celebrate. Thanks as always for listening to The Excerpt. We're produced by Shannon Rae Green and our executive producer is Laura Beatty. Bradley Glanzrock is a senior producer, and special thanks to producer Sara Ganim for her work on today's show.
You can get the podcast wherever you get your audio, and if you're on a smart speaker, just ask for The Excerpt. I'm Taylor Wilson, back tomorrow with more of The Excerpt from USA Today.