This week saw a former federal judge allege that the Supreme Court "betrayed" its duty ruling that states cannot kick former President Donald Trump off the ballot. 

That claim was raised in an Atlantic magazine op-ed piece written by Harvard Law School professor Laurence H. Tribe and former 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge J. Michael Luttig.

Pair say Supreme Court has done "a grave disservice"

Their article focused on the Supreme Court's finding earlier this month that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment does not preclude Trump from seeking reelection. It reads,

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Tribe and Luttig directed outrage towards America's highest judicial body, complaining that it has done "a grave disservice to both the Constitution and the nation."

"Our highest court dramatically and dangerously betrayed its obligation to enforce what once was the Constitution’s safety net for America’s democracy," they asserted.

Authors recall "devastation wrought by the Civil War"

"The Supreme Court has now rendered that safety net a dead letter, effectively rescinding it as if it had never been enacted," Tribe and Luttig continued.

"Our highest court has dramatically and dangerously betrayed its obligation to enforce what once was the Constitution’s safety net for America’s democracy," @judgeluttig and @tribelaw write: https://t.co/Jnm2jKj4Jw

— The Atlantic (@TheAtlantic) March 14, 2024

They alleged that "all nine justices denied 'We the People' the very power that those who wrote and ratified the Fourteenth Amendment presciently secured to us to save the republic from future insurrectionists—reflecting a lesson hard-learned from the devastation wrought by the Civil War."

However, the Supreme Court's decision has been met with approval from other legal experts, including George Washington Law professor Jonathan Turley.

Law professor praises decision: "Voters will vote"

"The Court showed a divided nation that we remain bound by shared constitutional values," Turley told Fox News shortly after the ruling was announced.

"After all of the years we have spent in this Republic we came to a point where these states claimed that they could unilaterally bar the leading presidential candidate from ballots to prevent people from voting for Donald Trump," he pointed out.

"The court here struck with a strong, and it appears unanimous, voice at least on the result that that’s not going to happen. Voters will vote," the law professor remarked.

"They’ll make their own verdict regardless of cases that happen involving President Trump. They will cast the most important verdict of all. They will vote for the next President of the United States," he concluded.