Another Sinister Reason Behind The SAVE Act

The SAVE Act is garbage because it is racist, xenophobic, and unnecessary - but I think there's another sinister purpose behind it.

When Donald Trump argued for immunity, he brought up the Take Care clause of the constitution. He believes that because a core executive function is to take care that the laws are faithfully executed, that he had a role and a responsibility to reach out to state election officials and ask for votes and push for alternate slates of electors. Therefore, since core executive functions are absolutely immune, the case against him brought by Jack Smith must be tossed out.

The Supreme Court, however, did not weigh in on whether Trump had a role in the election. From the immunity ruling:

On Trump’s view, the alleged conduct qualifies as official because it was undertaken to ensure the integrity and proper administration of the federal election. Of course, the President’s duty to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” plainly encompasses enforcement of federal election laws passed by Congress. Art. II, §3. And the President’s broad power to speak on matters of public concern does not exclude his public communications regarding the fairness and integrity of federal elections simply because he is running for re-election.

As the Government sees it, however, these allegations encompass nothing more than Trump’s “private scheme with private actors.” In its view, Trump can point to no plausible source of authority enabling the President to not only organize alternate slates of electors but also cause those electors—unapproved by any state official—to transmit votes to the President of the Senate for counting at the certification proceeding, thus interfering with the votes of States’ properly appointed electors. Indeed, the Constitution commits to the States the power to “appoint” Presidential electors “in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct.” The President, meanwhile, plays no direct role in the process, nor does he have authority to control the state officials who do. And the Framers, wary of “cabal, intrigue and corruption,” specifically excluded from service as electors “all those who from situation might be suspected of too great devotion to the president in office.” - Alexander Hamilton, Federalist 68

The concerns we noted at the outset—the expedition of this case, the lack of factual analysis by the lower courts, and the absence of pertinent briefing by the parties—thus become more prominent. We accordingly remand to the District Court to determine in the first instance—with the benefit of briefing we lack—whether Trump’s conduct in this area qualifies as official or unofficial.

(Incidentally, I find it particularly infuriating that The Supreme Court wouldn’t rule on whether Trump had a role in the fraudulent elector scheme because they didn’t get briefing on it - but they decided to issue a “rule for the ages” for all future presidents without receiving any briefing on anything outside the specific case in front of them. But we know they weren’t trying to do anything here other than let Trump off the hook. But I digress.)

So The Supreme Court left it up to the lower court to decide, and Jack Smith will issue his immunity brief to Judge Chutkan by September 26th where they will repeat the argument that Trump had no role in the states’ administration of elections. In fact, when he issued his new (superseding) indictment, he included a lot of new language emphasizing that point, including:

The defendant had no official responsibilities related to any state’s certification of the election results.

The Defendant had no official responsibilities related to the convening of legitimate electors or their signing and mailing of their certificates of vote.

The Defendant had no official responsibilities related to the certification proceeding, but he did have a personal interest as a candidate in being named the winner of the election.

All of that was added to the indictment after the Supreme Court issued their immunity ruling, and Jack Smith will argue this in depth his upcoming brief to the lower court.

But what if they pass the SAVE Act? The SAVE Act would require states to force voters to prove their citizenship in order to vote - something that would decimate voter registration. The racism and xenophobia is overt and is reminiscent of the battle Trump fought to put a citizenship question on the Census to return lower counts in blue areas by scaring folks out of filling out their Census. The SAVE Act is also redundant because it’s already illegal for non-citizens to vote. So what’s the point besides the fear mongering and othering? I think it’s to give a future despot like Trump the ability to control the outcome of the election.

Trump had no role in the states’ electors and I think the courts will agree (except Thomas and Alito probs), but if the SAVE Act is passed, that’s a federal election law that falls under the Take Care Clause, and would give him the ability to shove his tiny little hands into the election and throw out votes he doesn’t like with no evidence or consequences because he’d be absolutely immune from prosecution.

He would be able to steal the election - and he’d be immune from judicial review.

Is it any wonder it’s being championed by Donald Trump and one of the architects of his coup Mike Johnson? And now Donald Trump wants Mike Johnson to attach the SAVE Act to the continuing resolution to fund the government in an effort to kill the entire bill and shut down the government. Trump thinks this will make Joe Biden look bad, but even Mitch McConnell knows Americans will blame Republicans. Trump doesn’t care, though, what he does to Americans in his ambitions to take back the now-immune Oval.

We must never forget that from now on, the Oval Office comes with criminal immunity - and bad actors will do whatever they can to get a piece of it. We must vote accordingly. The Supreme Court has now made every election the most important election of our lifetimes by making the White House a potential seat of criminal activity based on the winners of elections, and the threat of exploitation of immunity will haunt us until we change the balance of the Supreme Court, and overturn this and other disastrous rulings.

Vote BLUE all the way down the ballot.

~AG