The Colorado Supreme Court issued a resounding decision on Tuesday night, ruling that the Constitution prohibits former President Donald Trump to hold federal office again. This disqualifies the Republican frontrunner for the Colorado presidential ballot in 2024. Trump is expected appeal the ruling to Supreme Court. If the Colorado Supreme Court were to be upheld by the justices
The Colorado Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday night that the Constitution forbids original President Donald Trump from running for federal office once more, disqualifying the Democrat frontrunner from Colorado’s 2024 presidential election.
Trump is anticipated to file a Supreme Court appeal against the decision. Trump could be eliminated from ballots across the country if the justices upheld the Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling.
The Colorado Supreme Court stated in its ruling that” we do not reach these conclusions lightly.” We are aware of the scope and importance of our current inquiries. Additionally, we are aware of our solemn obligation to uphold the law without regard for favors or fear and without letting people opinion influence the decisions we make.
The decision overturns a national court’s decision from next month in Denver. I said at the time:
A little-known constitutional provision may be used to prevent President Donald Trump from actually serving a second term, according to some legal experts in the days following the Capitol attack on January 6, 2021. Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which was enacted following the Civil War, was intended to prevent original Confederate leaders from serving in Congress. However, could the section that excluded officials who had participated in “insurrection or rebellion” also be used to prevent Trump from reelection based on his support for the Capitol riot?
Attorneys from all over the country have been attempting to make this case in the lead-up to 2024, but they have n’t yet received a direct response. However, a federal judge made the initial decision on the merits of the case on Friday. Federal District Judge Sarah B. Wallace wrote a withering opinion finding that Trump did in fact engage in insurrection after an historic trial in Denver. Wallace nevertheless decided that because Section 3’s language is n’t clear enough about whether it applies to presidents, he could run for office in the Colorado primary.
Among the lawful factors at play in this case, Wallace was certainly aware of the enormous ramifications of her choice and the possibility that disqualifying the Republican frontrunner might spark unrest. Without a clear, undeniable indication that such is the intent of Section 3, she wrote in her decision,” Part of the court’s decision is its reluctance to embrace an interpretation that would disqualify eminently from the presidency.” Judges in other jurisdictions have avoided making a decision on the matter, dismissing comparable lawsuits on legal grounds in Minnesota and New Hampshire. In Michigan, a judge ruled that the fundamental issues—including the definition of insurrection—were “nonjusticiable, democratic” issues that should be decided by Congress.
Undoubtedly, there was disagreement on the Colorado Supreme Court. It ordered Secretary of State Jena Griswold to drop Trump from the Republican primary the following year on Tuesday, but it postponed that decision until January 4 so that Trump could file an appeal. The Colorado Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday night that the Constitution forbids original President Donald Trump from running for federal office once more, disqualifying the Democrat frontrunner from Colorado’s 2024 presidential election. Trump is anticipated to file a Supreme Court appeal with the decision. If the justices upheld the Colorado Supreme Court
The Colorado Supreme Court issued a resounding decision on Tuesday night, ruling that the Constitution prohibits former President Donald Trump to hold federal office again. This disqualifies the Republican frontrunner for the Colorado presidential ballot in 2024. Trump is expected appeal the ruling to Supreme Court. If the Colorado Supreme Court were to be upheld by the justices
Justin Sullivan/Getty. Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.. In a earthshaking decision on Tuesday evening, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution bars former President Donald Trump from holding federal office again—disqualifying the Republican frontrunner from the 2024 presidential ballot in Colorado.. Trump is expected to appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court. If the justices were to affirm the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision, Trump could be wiped off ballots nationwide.. “We do not reach these conclusions lightly,” the Colorado Supreme Court wrote in its decision. “We are mindful of the magnitude and weight of the questions now before us. We are likewise mindful of our solemn duty to apply the law, without fear or favor, and without being swayed by public reaction to the decisions that the law mandates we reach.”. The decision overturns the ruling of a federal court in Denver last month. As I reported then:. In the days after the Capitol attack on January 6, 2021, some legal experts began to speculate that a little-known constitutional provision might be used to block President Donald Trump from ever serving a second term. The 14th Amendment, passed after the Civil War, included a portion, called Section 3, that was designed to keep former Confederate leaders out of Congress. But could the section, which disqualified officials who had engaged in “insurrection or rebellion,” also be used to block Trump from running for president again, based on his actions supporting for the Capitol riot?. In the lead-up to 2024, attorneys across the country have been trying to make exactly this case—and so far, they haven’t received a direct answer. But on Friday, a federal judge ruled for the first time on the merits of the argument. Following a landmark trial in Denver, Federal District Judge Sarah B. Wallace authored a scathing opinion finding that Trump did indeed engage in insurrection. Nonetheless, Wallace decided, he could appear on the Colorado primary ballot, because Section 3’s language isn’t specific enough on the matter of whether it applies to presidents.. …Among the legal considerations in the case, Wallace was undoubtedly conscious of the monumental consequences of her decision, and the potential that ruling out the Republican frontrunner could cause civil unrest. “Part of the court’s decision is its reluctance to embrace an interpretation which would disqualify a presidential candidate without a clear, unmistakable indication that such is the intent of Section 3,” she wrote in her decision. Elsewhere, judges have avoided ruling on the issue, dismissing similar lawsuits in New Hampshire and Minnesota on procedural grounds. In Michigan, a judge ruled that the questions at the heart of the cause—including the meaning of insurrection—were “nonjusticiable, political” issues that should be up to Congress to settle.. Evidently, the Colorado Supreme Court disagreed. On Tuesday, it ordered Secretary of State Jena Griswold to exclude Trump from next year’s Republican primary ballot—but stayed its decision until January 4 to allow time for Trump to appeal.
