TRUMP V ANDERSON - NATURAL BORN CITIZEN

 

23-719_feah.pdf (supremecourt.gov)

HERITAGE REPORTING CORPORATION

Official Reporters

1220 L Street, N.W., Suite 206

Washington, D.C. 20005

(202) 628-4888

www.hrccourtreporters.com

 

Pg1 Official - Subject to Final Review

1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

3 DONALD J. TRUMP, )

4 Petitioner, )

5 v. ) No. 23-719

6 NORMA ANDERSON, ET AL., )

7 Respondents. )

8 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 9

10 Washington, D.C.

11 Thursday, February 8, 2024

12

13 The above-entitled matter came on for oral

14 argument before the Supreme Court of the United

15 States at 10:08 a.m.

16

17 APPEARANCES:

18 JONATHAN F. MITCHELL, ESQUIRE, Austin, Texas; on behalf

19 of the Petitioner.

20 JASON C. MURRAY, ESQUIRE, Denver, Colorado; on behalf

21 of Respondents Anderson, et al.

22 SHANNON W. STEVENSON, Solicitor General, Denver,

23 Colorado; on behalf of Respondent Griswold.

 

Pg 108 Official - Subject to Final Review

20 MR. MURRAY: No, Your Honor, because

21 different states can have different procedures. Some

22 states may allow insurrectionists to be on the

23 ballot. They may say we're not looking past the

24 papers; we're not going to look into federal

25 constitutional questions. It's the sort of -- even Heritage Reporting Corporation

 

Pg 107 Official - Subject to Final Review

1 in this election cycle, there are -- there are

2 candidates who are on the ballot in some states even

3 though they're not natural-born citizens and off the

4 ballot in other states. And that's just a function

5 of states' power to enforce -- to preserve their own

6 electors and avoid disenfranchisement of their own

7 citizens.

 

Pg 134  Official - Subject to Final Review

2 MS. STEVENSON: I think you should be

3 concerned about it, Your Honor, but I think the

4 concern is not as high as maybe it's made out to be

5 in particularly some of the amicus briefs. And,

6 again, under Article II, there is a huge amount of

7 disparity in the candidates that end up on the ballot

8 on -- in different states in every election.

9 Just this election, there's a candidate who

10 Colorado excluded from the primary ballot, who is on

11 the ballot in other states even though he is not a

12 natural-born citizen. And that's just -- that's a

13 feature of our process. It's not a bug.

14 And then I think, with respect to the

15 decision-making and -- you know, we're here so that

16 this Court can give us nationwide guidance on some of

17 the legal principles that are involved. I think that

18 reduces the potential amount of disparity that would

19 arise between the states.

20 And then with respect to the factual record

21 and how that gets issued and implemented, the states

22 have processes for this. And I think we need to let

23 that play out and accept that there may be some

24 messiness of federalism here because that's what the

25 Electors Clause assumes will happen. And if Heritage Reporting Corporation

 

Pg 135 Official - Subject to Final Review

1 different states apply their principles of -- of

2 collateral estoppel and come to different results,

3 that's okay. And -- and Congress can act at any time

4 if -- if it thinks that it's truly federalism run

5 amok.