Former U.S. Attorney Predicts SCOTUS Will Overturn Colorado’s Ballot Ruling

Ty Cobb, a former assistant U.S. attorney for the District of Maryland, predicted that the U.S. Supreme Court would unanimously reverse the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision to disqualify former President Donald Trump from the state’s ballot in 2024.

During an interview on CNN, Cobb — who defended the Trump administration during Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s baseless investigation into alleged Trump-Russia collusion — argued that while he believes Trump’s actions in challenging the 2020 election have been a “disaster” for the Republican Party, he believes the U.S. Supreme Court will unanimously reverse the decision in Colorado.

“I think this case will be handled quickly,” the longtime attorney said. “I think it could be 9-0 in the Supreme Court for Trump.

Below is a transcript of the exchange, via Grabien:

BURNETT: “I want to go to Ty Cobb now, the former Trump White House lawyer. So, Ty, 133 pages and then you have the three dissents, which I’m trying to work my way through here, from what you’ve seen, what do you take away?”

COBB: “So, I — the way I see this is — is that the Supreme Court has to take this. They can stay the dates in Colorado. They’ll move expeditiously. I was struck by the majority opinion and the amount of verbiage devoted to the sort of strawman arguments. You know, the real key issue in this case is, is Trump an officer of the United States in the context in which that term is used in Article 3 of the 14th Amendment. And in 2010, Chief Justice Roberts explained in Free Enterprise that people don’t vote for officers of the United States. Article 2, ‘officers of the United States’ is commonly understood in the Constitution to refer to appointed officials. And to the extent that the president or the vice president are included as an officer or included within the admonitions of the Constitution, they are typically highlighted, like in the impeachment clause which specifically says president, vice president. So I think this case will be handled quickly. I think it could be 9-0 in the Supreme Court for Trump.”

BURNETT: “Can I just say, Ty, that would be — I don’t ever like about who appointed whom because you like to just believe in the impartiality of justice, but nonetheless it has become important. And as Trump is already pointing out, ‘Oh, the Colorado Supreme Court, they were all appointed by Democrats,’ okay, sure. It was a 4-3 ruling. They didn’t all rule against you. Supreme Court, when we often hear about how politicized it is — and I know we’re looking into the distance here, but if you’re looking at 9-0, that would sure be a statement.”

COBB: “Yeah. So, I do believe it could be 9-0 because the law is therein. And as you’ll recall, I was once an advocate of this position and there have been multiple law review articles, the most prominent by Bill Boyd and his colleague. I was on a panel with Professor Boyd at the University of Chicago Institute of Politics discussing this, and I heard his views, and his scholarship is excellent. On the other hand, there are multiple competing scholars who disagree and highlight the point that I just made about the multiple Supreme Court decisions, which are three, that do not conclude that officers as used in the as this context include the president or the vice president. And after — I mean, there have been many Constitution professors — Steve Calabrese of Northwestern probably the most prominent one — who after reading all the scholarship changed his mind. He was originally a supporter of the idea that this outcome was appropriate, but he later concluded, despite his strong feelings against Trump, that Trump would have to be beaten at the ballot box, and I think, sadly, that’s the case. And it will be a race to get there. The Supreme Court, though, will not hesitate to move quickly to this. They know what the stakes are. They know what their responsibility is, and they can delay some of these Colorado dates to the extent that they feel they’re obligated to or have to.”

BURNETT: “Right. And obviously, his name remains on the ballot until they rule one way or the other. That was one of the predicates of the ruling today out of Colorado. You hear the music, Ty. That music is from Trump’s rally in Waterloo, Iowa. He’s there and he’s on stage and right now he’s basking in the music and the crowd, and then he’ll obviously speak. Now, we have this statement, but I think when I just said to David Axelrod that a Republican in another swing state who is dealing with one of these issues is that this ruling would supercharge the extremists. What do you think as he walks out there? Is this something he sees as basically a win in a certain sense?”

COBB: “Oh, totally. Oh, totally. This vindicates his insistence that this is political conspiracy to interfere with the election and that he’s the target and people shouldn’t tolerate that in America. It’s — it’s doo-dah, but that’s the way he tries to sell this. Now, the reality is he committed these crimes in 2021. Jack Smith’s only been on the job for 13 months at most, so this is — you know, justice has moved relatively speedy. This hasn’t been stalled to attack the election.”