SCOTUS Trump Case, U.S. Strikes In Iraq, Pakistani Elections

In my memory, in my mind, it's more stylized than that.

You talking to me?

Anyway, today the Supreme Court holds a historic constitutional debate.

That's the question justices will be weighing.

In Baghdad, a U.S. drone strike took out a leader of an Iran-backed militia.

The militia is accused of killing three American soldiers in Jordan,

but will this act of retaliation prompt more violence?

A popular former leader is barred from the race and sitting in a jail cell,

and there's already been political violence that's killed dozens.

Stay with us. We'll give you the news you need to start your day.

That's on the TED Radio Hour from NPR.

Vice President Kamala Harris and her running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz,

are celebrating their newly minted ticket.

And Democrats are pitching their platform to the nation.

Listen to the NPR Politics Podcast for the latest news from the DNC.

It says a former official may not return to office after engaging in insurrection or rebellion.

Trump gave a speech to supporters who then stormed the Capitol on January 6, 2021.

The case turns on many questions, like whether that attack counts as insurrection,

and who gets to decide if the rule applies to Trump.

Hi there, Kerry.

which was passed after the Civil War to try to keep Confederates out of government.

This provision says anyone who swore an oath to the Constitution

and went on to engage in insurrection is disqualified from public office

unless two-thirds of Congress votes to grant that person amnesty.

It's never been applied to a former president,

and it's only been applied about eight times since the 1860s.

I talked with Jason Murray, a lawyer who will argue the case today for the Colorado voters,

and he says this part of the Constitution remains relevant.

Here's more of what Murray had to say.

No other American president has refused to peacefully hand over the reins of power after losing an election.

which is why is this amendment being cited now when it's so rarely,

or this provision of it, so rarely been cited in the past.

What is former President Trump's response?

First, he says the president is actually not an officer of the United States

because he says presidents are elected, not appointed.

So he says that part of the 14th Amendment should not apply to him.

Trump also says he did not engage in an insurrection on January 6th.

He's also making the case that barring him from the ballot will open the floodgates.

Scott Gessler is one of Trump's lawyers.

He says there's going to be a constant stream of litigation if the Supreme Court allows these doors to open.

You're going to see attacks on President Biden.

You're going to see attacks on Kamala Harris, Vice President of Paris.

You're going to see attacks on senators, representatives, other people,

trying to prevent them from being on the ballot.

it's because I caught him at the airport where he traveled to defend Trump

on another ballot disqualification issue in Illinois.

I'm trying to think this through from the Supreme Court's point of view, though.

Chief Justice John Roberts has tried, when possible,

to make the courts seem a little less political,

to keep out of political controversies where possible,

to give narrow rulings where possible.

And now we have this gigantic question of whether a former president of the United States

should be on the presidential ballot, possibly in multiple states.

What are the court's options here?

You know, the court is now at the center of a presidential election just like it was in 2000

when it stopped the Florida recount and handed the White House to George W. Bush.

But in this case, the justices have a few options.

They could decide to disqualify Trump just like the Colorado Supreme Court did.

Depending on how they rule, it could have a cascading effect in other states

at the primary and the general election level.

They could decide this is a political question, Steve,

one for Congress and voters to answer, not the courts.

Or they could side with Trump and dozens of other Republicans in Congress

and keep Trump on the ballot.

It's kind of hard to predict what the justices might do here.

Experts want them to issue a definitive ruling soon

before many more voters go to the polls on Super Tuesday in early March.

for an attack that killed three U.S. soldiers.

whose group the United States blamed for an attack on an American base.

This is all part of a multinational conflict.

Grab your maps.

The Americans were killed at a base in Jordan.

The militia leader was killed in Iraq.

He was part of a group that's linked to Iran,

which in turn has vowed to respond to the Israel-Hamas war.

Numerous armed groups have opened fire throughout the region,

and the latest incident led to a days-long U.S. response.

Hi, Jane.

He was called Abu Bakr al-Saudi,

and an Interior Ministry official says he was head of logistics for the Iran-backed group.

The U.S., in confirming the strike,

said al-Saudi had been directly involved in attacks on U.S. forces.

A bit of confusion still here

because initial reports from the Interior Ministry said three people were killed,

and it's still not clear whether that was the case

and whether there were other militia figures.

This was a targeted strike, Layla,

using an adapted Hellfire missile with a non-explosive warhead,

the kind used by the U.S. for counterterrorism operations in crowded areas,

which this indeed was.

The vehicle burst into flames on impact of the airstrike.

Everyone in the car was killed, but there were no other casualties reported.

What's the mood in the capital this morning?

There are really not a lot of good scenarios here.

It's a workday here, so people, in fact, did go to work.

Shops are opening. It seems relatively normal.

But this afternoon is the funeral ceremony in Baghdad

for the commander who was killed.

Some of the Iran-backed groups have called for protesters

to gather near the U.S. Embassy,

and in the past those gatherings have sometimes turned violent.

And some members of the anti-U.S. resistance coalition

that Khattab Hezbollah belonged to

have called for new attacks against the United States.

The Iraqi Hezbollah itself halted attacks

in deference to the Iraqi government recently,

but it could very well announce a resumption,

and that would signal a new wave of attacks from both sides.

Let's talk about the wider repercussions, though, here.

The U.S. and Iraq recently started talks

on the future of American forces in that country.

Does this killing impact those talks?

An Iraqi military spokesman, Yahya Rasool,

said these latest attacks were increasing pressure

on the Iraqi government to essentially expel U.S. forces.

Now, this wouldn't be an overnight process.

It would be the result of talks and negotiations,

as the U.S. is still an essential security partner.

But after withdrawing after its invasion of Iraq

and the occupation,

troops came back here in 2014 to fight ISIS

at the invitation of the Iraqi government.

The U.S. views these recent attacks that it's launched

as a response to being attacked by militias,

but there's increasing anger in Parliament, in the streets,

in the halls of government, even,

at violations of Iraqi sovereignty.

And just really quickly,

because this is a complicated but important part,

these militias that are attacking

and being attacked by the U.S.,

they actually have brigades

that are part of Iraqi government security forces.

and it's quite an endeavor.

so here are some of the numbers.

Tens of millions of people will be eligible to vote

at more than 90,000 polling stations,

guarded by more than 700,000 police officers and soldiers

who are needed because dozens of people

have been killed in bombings and attacks

in the hours leading up to the election.

She covers Pakistan from her base in Mumbai.

Hi, Diya.

How is it going so far?

because authorities have disrupted cellular services,

citing security concerns, you know, as you mentioned,

because there's been these deadly attacks

on polling booths and candidates,

and militant attacks like this have really been on the rise

in the past two years.

But rights groups worry that there might be

a more nefarious purpose,

because there was a crackdown ahead of these elections

that targeted Imran Khan,

who's arguably Pakistan's most popular leader.

He's the former PM.

He was ousted from power after he fell out with the military,

and that's Pakistan's most powerful institution.

turned populist politician,

but I understand he's not even on the ballot today, right?

He's in prison serving multiple sentences.

His party isn't even allowed to participate in the polls,

and yet these elections are still very much about him.

His party has tried to work around these obstacles.

His allies are running as independents.

Chatbots tell citizens who to vote for in the elections.

They're running campaign rallies on TikTok,

and they're using generative AI

to create Khan-like personas to use on social media

where he urges his base to vote.

One of Khan's allies, Taimur Jagra,

explained it to me like this.

What we've had is AI-generated messages of Imran Khan

so that in the absence of Imran Khan's pictures,

Imran Khan's voice being deliberately taken away from the people,

that it acts as a source of motivation to his voters.

He's not on the ballot.

Is this actually working?

Video messaging is key in Pakistan

because literacy rates are really low,

and this is an appeal to young voters.

They're a huge block.

They get their information from social media,

and they're a key base for Khan's party.

And so in Pakistan's second-largest city, Lahore,

most people we've spoken to

say that they are voting for independence aligned with Khan.

Some folks are even warning each other on WhatsApp groups

that if they don't go to vote,

someone else will fill in their ballot for them.

But it's hard to imagine Khan's allies

returning to government in any form

because the army is so opposed to Khan.

So who might be?

expected a different former prime minister to come to power.

His name is Nawaz Sharif.

One analyst, Niaz Murtaza, tells me

he expects to see a governing coalition

that's weak and easily swayed by the military.

It's going to be a really hobbled government

with the army running the show from behind.

But here's the thing.

Pakistani politics is cyclical.

Today's jailed politician is tomorrow's favourite.

So one ally of Khan tells me

even if they're excluded from power in this election cycle,

they're going to watch and wait

because they know how Pakistan operates.

I'm Laila Fawzi.

Today's Up First was edited by Krishnadev Kalamur,

Miguel Macias and Mohamed El-Bardisi.

It was produced by Ziad Bach, Ben Abrams and Julie Deppenbrock.

We get engineering support from Robert Rodriguez

and our technical director is Zach Coleman.

Join us tomorrow.

while financially supporting public media with Up First Plus.

Learn more at plus.npr.org.

That's plus.npr.org.