The Colorado Supreme Court has ruled that Donald Trump’s actions around Jan. 6 disqualified him from the presidency and from participating in the state’s 2024 primary runoff.
John Minchillo/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
John Minchillo/AP
The Colorado Supreme Court has ruled that Donald Trump’s actions around Jan. 6 disqualified him from the presidency and from participating in the state’s 2024 primary runoff.
John Minchillo/AP
Lawyers and activists – mostly left-wing – have maintained for months that a Constitutional clause dating from the Civil War should prevent former President Donald Trump, the current Republican front-runner, from ever holding office again.
They say Trump’s words and actions during the attack on and near the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 constitute a violation of the law. Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which excludes from office anyone “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against the United States. And liberal-leaning groups have made this argument court in many states.
Colorado has become the first to agree on Tuesdaywhen its Supreme Court ruled that Trump was disqualified from appearing on the state’s primary ballot.
“Because he is disqualified, it would be an unlawful act under the Election Code for the secretary to register him as a candidate in the presidential primary vote,” reads the 213-page opinion.
The historic 4-3 decision – which overturns a district court decision since last month — the first time a state high court has held that Section 3 applies to both Trump’s conduct and the presidential office itself.
The judges – all appointed by Democratic governors in this increasingly blue state – acknowledge that this amounts to “uncharted territory.”
And “to maintain the status quo,” they maintained their power until January 4, the day before the deadline set by the Secretary of State to certify primary ballots (Colorado’s presidential primary will take place on March 5). This means that if the U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear the case and is still pending as of that date, Trump’s name should be on the ballot after all.
Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung called the decision “completely flawed” and pledged to “promptly file an appeal to the United States Supreme Court and a concurrent request to stay this decision profoundly undemocratic.
For his part, President Biden said Wednesday that Trump “certainly supported an insurrection, but added, ‘Now, if the 14th Amendment applies, I’ll let the court make that decision.’
So what could happen next, in Colorado and beyond?
Justin Levitt, a constitutional law professor at Loyola Law School, told NPR that as long as a petition for review by the U.S. Supreme Court is filed by Jan. 5, it will be “99.9 percent.” » chances of Trump remaining on the Colorado primary ballot.
And if Trump — with his steady lead in Republican polls — wins the primary, Levitt expects there will be a similar legal effort to prevent him from participating in the general election for the same reason.
“All of this is extremely important in a few months, when we will have this fight again,” he adds. “But it is very unlikely that the immediate impact will be decisive for the primary.”
Republicans threaten to withdraw from Colorado primaries
Prominent Republicans — including Trump’s rivals for the presidential nomination — are lining up to criticize the Colorado court’s decision and are already vowing to take action against it.
Ronna McDaniel, chairwoman of the Republican National Committee, wrote online that “Our legal team looks forward to contributing to the fight for victory,” referring to Trump’s expected appeal.
Just hours after Tuesday’s decision, Trump’s team sent an email with the subject line “REMOVED FROM BALLOT,” urging his supporters to contribute to his campaign. It is This is not the first request of this type linked to the Colorado affair by Trump, known for raise money for his legal woes – and whose political personality is motivated by the story of persecution by enemies.
The Colorado Republican Party also launched a online campaign urging donors to “help us keep Trump on the ballot and fight this election interference.”
Colorado Republicans also threatened withdraw from the primary and convert to a managed party caucus system if the decision is upheld.
“We are not going to stand by and let this happen, and if necessary, we will withdraw from the primary and engage in a strict caucus process that would allow our voters to choose Donald Trump if they wish,” he said. said Rep. Dave Williams. , THE decidedly conservative Chairman of the Republican Party of Colorado, told CNN Tuesday.
This may be easier said than done, since the RNC has already approved the state party’s nomination plan, ABC News reports. Williams told Colorado Public Radio that the Republicans would request a waiver, but the Democratic Secretary of State responded that they could not legally move to a caucus for their presidential selection.
Even some of Trump’s Republican opponents are siding with him in this matter.
Vivek Ramaswamy engaged in a statement and video to withdraw from the Colorado GOP primary ballot “until Trump is also allowed to appear on the ballot.”
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who campaigned to prevent Trump from returning to power, criticized the court’s decision shortly after it was released. Speaking at an event In New Hampshire, he said Trump should not be stopped from being president by a court, but rather by the nation’s voters.
The Colorado Supreme Court in Denver heard arguments earlier this month. Their ruling overturned that of a lower court, which said the constitutional clause applied to Trump’s actions but not the presidency.
David Zalubowski/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
David Zalubowski/AP
The Colorado Supreme Court in Denver heard arguments earlier this month. Their ruling overturned that of a lower court, which said the constitutional clause applied to Trump’s actions but not the presidency.
David Zalubowski/AP
What Colorado’s decision could mean for the country
Legal experts and election officials have long predicted that challenges to Trump’s 14th Amendment would end up in the U.S. Supreme Court, which would be decided for the country as a whole rather than on a state-by-state basis.
Courts have ruled against similar efforts in Arizona, Minnesota and Michiganalthough other legal battles are still ongoing – or have yet to be filed – in other states.
Loyola’s Levitt said Colorado’s decision would have no direct impact on those other cases.
This “considered” opinion gives other courts something to look at, to see whether they agree or not, he noted. But he added that the incentives remain basically the same for Trump’s team to slow down the process and for the other side to speed it up.
“This postpones the case for a few months, but does not stop the clock on other proceedings,” he explained.
And although the Supreme Court has a conservative qualified majorityincluding three judges appointed by Trump himself, it’s unclear how he would rule on Colorado’s appeal.
Kim Wehle, professor at the University of Baltimore School of Law, said Morning edition that she believes the Supreme Court would take this case seriously because of the massive implications it has not only for 2024 but for future elections.
“I think there should be an incentive to say to future presidents, ‘Look, don’t do what happened on January 6, there will be consequences,'” she added. “But we are in a politicized world and we arguably have a politicized Supreme Court.”
Experts say he could choose to send the case back to the state level, or avoid ruling on the merits in another way (such as by focusing on the wording of the clause, such as l ‘ did the lower Colorado court).
This is not the only consequential case involving Trump before the Supreme Court. The federal special prosecutor asked the judges to quickly decide whether the former president enjoyed broad immunity criminal charges as a result of his duties.
Considering the 14th Amendment, Levitt says the difficult question is not whether Trump is qualified to hold the job, but rather who gets to make that decision. He thinks the courts will want to defer to voters and says he’s a little skeptical that “the law is going to decide this question before the people.”
“There are a lot of issues that, if we get to November and the American people decide they don’t want him as chief executive, the courts will never have to decide.” he.
NPR’s Vanessa Romo contributed reporting.
