The Colorado Supreme Court’s groundbreaking ruling to exclude former President Donald Trump from the state’s 2024 ballot, citing the “insurrectionist clause” of the 14th Amendment, is now under the scrutiny of the U.S. Supreme Court.
Trump Appeals to Supreme Court
On Wednesday, Trump appealed to the Supreme Court to overturn the Colorado ruling that excluded him from the ballot.
Barring Voters from Electing Presidential Candidates
Trump’s legal team contends that the exclusion decision, if upheld, would be unprecedented, barring voters from electing a major-party presidential candidate.
Key Constitutional Questions in the Case
Central to the case are crucial constitutional questions, such as whether the 14th Amendment’s insurrection clause applies to presidential candidates and who qualifies as having engaged in insurrection.
The argument
Trump’s lawyers argue that the Colorado ruling contradicts the foundational concept of “government of the people, by the people,” stressing the need for the Supreme Court to address this critical issue.
Colorado Supreme Court’s Historic 4-3 Decision
The Colorado Supreme Court’s 4-3 decision marks the first application of the disqualification clause against a presidential candidate.
Post-Civil War Constitutional Provision
The Colorado decision rested on a constitutional provision dating back to the post-Civil War era, prohibiting individuals who participated in insurrection or rebellion from holding public office.
14th Amendment’s Insurrection Clause Origins
The insurrection clause, also known as Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, was initially intended to prevent former Confederates from returning to their former government positions.
Trump’s Capitol Riot Role and Exemption
Previously, a judge acknowledged Trump’s role in the Capitol riot but argued that the presidency is exempt from the insurrection clause.
Maine State Court Applies Insurrection Clause
This clause, however, has been applied in the Maine state court, leading to a similar exclusion with potential national implications.
Supreme Court’s Conservative Majority Justics
The Supreme Court’s conservative majority, including three Trump appointees, is likely to influence a broader effort to disqualify the leading GOP presidential candidate from appearing on the ballots of other states in preparation for the 2024 election.
Court’s Approach to Trump’s Ballot Eligibility
Legal analysts are divided on how the Court will proceed. James Heilpern, an appellate attorney, emphasized the importance of correctly addressing the critical issue of Trump’s eligibility for the ballot.
Not an “Officer of the United States”
Trump’s defense is based on the argument that the president is not an “officer of the United States” as per the 14th Amendment.
President is an Officer of the United States
However, according to Heilpern, his research, including historical documents like the Postal Act of 1799 and presidential proclamations, contradicts this claim, clearly identifying the president as a U.S. officer.
Ruling in Favor of Trump
David Schultz, a political science professor, predicts the Court may avoid directly addressing the insurrection issue, possibly ruling in favor of Trump on different grounds. Meanwhile,
No Criminal Charges Filed against Trump
Trump’s legal team argues against his involvement in the insurrection, noting the absence of criminal charges.
Broader Significance of 14th Amendment Interpretation
Heilpern points out the crucial nature of this case beyond Trump’s eligibility. It touches upon interpreting the 14th Amendment and its application to presidential actions, potentially reshaping the legal framework around presidential accountability.
Supreme Court to Shape Insurrection Allegation Precedents
The Supreme Court’s ruling could set a precedent for how future allegations of insurrection or rebellion are addressed in the context of presidential candidates.
Urgency Grows for Swift Ruling as 2024 Election Nears
As the 2024 election approaches, the urgency for a definitive ruling intensifies. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, the group challenging Trump’s candidacy in Colorado, is calling for a swift resolution to clarify the situation for voters.
More from AllThingsFinance: Court Finally Unseals Secretive Case of Jan 6 Offender
Samuel Lazar sentenced for Jan. 6 insurrection; previously confidential case now revealed: Court Finally Unseals Secretive Case of Jan 6 Offender
Jack Smith continues pushing Judge Cannon, reminding her that “the speedy trial clock” is ticking
Jack Smith urges Judge Aileen Cannon for a speedy trial in a classified documents case involving ex-President Trump: Jack Smith continues pushing Judge Cannon, reminding her that “the speedy trial clock” is ticking
Defamation lawsuit against Kari Lake advances while people compare her to Rudy Giuliani
Kari Lake loses First Amendment right to accuse Maricopa County recorder; Arizona Republic ponders if she’s channeling Rudy Giuliani in her sleep : Defamation lawsuit against Kari Lake advances while people compare her to Rudy Giuliani
More Democrats are flipping in a crucial swing state than Republicans
In Pennsylvania, a significant number of registered Democrats flipping is sending an unflattering signal to President Biden: More Democrats are flipping in a crucial swing state than Republicans
