The Colorado Supreme Court is removing former President Donald Trump from the primary ballot, saying he is ineligible to be president.
In a stunning and unprecedented decision, the Colorado Supreme Court removed former President Donald Trump from the state’s 2024 ballot, ruling that he isn’t an eligible presidential candidate because of the 14th Amendment’s “insurrectionist ban.”
“Even when the siege on the Capitol was fully underway, he continued to support it by repeatedly demanding that Vice President (Mike) Pence refuse to perform his constitutional duty and by calling Senators to persuade them to stop the counting of electoral votes.
“President Trump’s direct and express efforts, over several months, exhorting his supporters to march to the Capitol to prevent what he falsely characterized as an alleged fraud on the people of this country were indisputably overt and voluntary.”
Ratified after the Civil War, the 14th Amendment says officials who take an oath to support the Constitution are banned from future office if they “engaged in insurrection.” But the wording is vague, it doesn’t explicitly mention the presidency, and has only been applied twice since 1919.
We have full confidence that the U.S. Supreme Court will quickly rule in our favor and finally put an end to these unAmerican lawsuits,” Trump campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung said in a statement.
Chief Justice Brian Boatright, one of the three dissenters on the seven-member court, wrote that he believes Colorado election law “was not enacted to decide whether a candidate engaged in insurrection,” and said he would have dismissed the challenge to Trump’s eligibility.
LINKS
AP: Colorado Supreme Court bans Trump from the state’s ballot under Constitution’s insurrection clause | @negativenull@startrek.website
Washington Post: Donald Trump is barred from Colorado’s 2024 primary ballot, the state Supreme Court rules | @silence7@slrpnk.net
CNBC: Colorado Supreme Court disqualifies Trump from 2024 ballot, pauses ruling to allow appeal | @return2ozma
NBC News: Colorado Supreme Court kicks Donald Trump off the state's 2024 ballot for violating the U.S. Constitution. | 18-24-61-B-17-17-4
CNN: Colorado Supreme Court removes Trump from 2024 ballot | A Phlaming Phoenix
CNN:Colorado Supreme Court removes Trump from 2024 ballot based on 14th Amendment’s ‘insurrectionist ban’ | @Boddhisatva
New York Times: Trump Is Disqualified From the 2024 Ballot, Colorado Supreme Court Rules | @silence7@slrpnk.net
That is more about retaliation, not law.
You are not wrong, but the GOP doesn't care. A lot of the shitty Supreme Court decisions in the last few sessions didn't even have standing if this was real life, yet they don't care. If the GOP thinks it will get them power they will find a way to get it through the courts and I don't trust the Fedsoc six to save Democracy
If the SCOTUS return a verdict that is contrary to Consitutional law, the State would ignore it. SCOTUS has a real problem on their hands with this case and could forever harm the judicial power if they don't follow the law. A good example is Minersville School District v. Gobitis (1940) when SCOTUS , in a 8-1 ruling, forced all students to recite the pledge of allegence. It said that "national cohesion" was "inferior to none in the hierarchy of legal values," and that national unity was "the basis of national security." Religious expression, in other words, took a back seat to patriotism.
In West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943), Jehovah’s Witnesses were expelled from school after they refused to salute the flag. But this time, the justices ruled 6-3 for the family’s right to freely express their religious beliefs.
“That’s a pretty dramatic reversal,” says Schultz. “The court issued what was an incredibly unpopular opinion during a war—that you can’t require people to salute the flag. But it was also one of the most beautifully written opinions I’ve ever read.”
Writing for the majority, Justice Robert Jackson wrote, “If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion, or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein.”
Schultz wonders if the rapid about-face had something to do with the atrocities committed by Germany based on religious persecution. “Maybe that’s what shakes up the Court, the realization that we can’t be Nazi Germany.”
I don't know that I follow the thread from your examples to the current case, but ignoring that for a second, I don't think the 14th amendment defines insurrection, so it is conceivable in my uneducated mind that the SC could just come up with an inane reading of insurrection and make it not apply to Trump.
You don't think Texas could find a MAGA Federal or State Judge willing to make a finding of fact that Biden is "directly formenting an insurrection" at the Southern Border?
Border crossing is not attempting to overthrow the government. They are fleeing other nations.
When has reality stopped Republicans?