WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court expressed deep skepticism Thursday that Colorado has the authority to remove former President Donald Trump from the Republican primary ballot because of his actions to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
A majority of justices appeared to think during the two hours of debate that states have no role in deciding whether a presidential candidate can be barred from running under a provision of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution which prohibits people “engaged in the insurrection” from running. Detention office.
Justices across the ideological spectrum have raised concerns that states are reaching different conclusions about whether a candidate can run, and several have indicated that only Congress can enforce the provision in question.
Throughout the debate, the justices barely addressed the essential question at the heart of the case: whether Trump participated in an insurrection. The decision is unlikely to hinge on this question.
The Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, is tackling several new and consequential legal questions regarding Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, enacted in the wake of the Civil War. Colorado voters filed a lawsuit saying Trump should be expelled because of his efforts to defy the 2020 election results during the events leading up to the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.
Section 3, intended to prevent former Confederates from returning to power in the U.S. government, states that anyone who had previously served as an “officer of the United States” and was subsequently involved in an insurrection would be barred from holding office. federal functions.
But during oral arguments, the justices rejected the idea that this provision could be enforced by states.
Chief Justice John Roberts said the “purpose” of the 14th Amendment was to restrict state power after the Civil War in an effort to bring the Confederate states into line and questioned why it would give the states the possibility of excluding a presidential candidate from the ballot. .
“Wouldn’t that be the last place you would seek permission for the states, including the Confederate States, to operate the presidential election process?” He asked.
Taking a similar approach, conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh said it was clear from the language of the 14th Amendment that “Congress has the primary role here,” citing a decision dating back to the civil war much discussed during the briefing which marked a first interpretation of the provision.
The justices also questioned the practical implications of allowing interpretation of the provision on a state-by-state basis.
“I think the question you have to ask is why should a single state decide who is president of the United States,” Justice Elena Kagan, one of three liberal justices, told Jason Murray, the attorney representing the voters of Colorado.
“That sounds quite extraordinary, doesn’t it?” she added.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a conservative, echoed that sentiment, saying “this just doesn’t seem like a state decision.”
Conservative Justice Samuel Alito was among those who called states reaching divergent conclusions on the issue an “unmanageable situation.”
Roberts predicted that if Colorado’s decision were upheld, some states would then exclude other presidential candidates, both Republican and Democratic, and cause chaos in presidential elections.
“It’s a pretty daunting consequence,” he said.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, one of the liberals, seemed to agree, questioning why the authors of the 14th Amendment “would design a system that could result in interim disuniformity in this manner, when an election is underway and different states suddenly say, ‘You’re eligible, you’re not.’
The justices also addressed the question of whether Section 3 does not require implementing legislation, as the Colorado plaintiffs claim.
If no legislation is necessary, Alito wonders whether a military officer could simply refuse to follow orders from a president deemed to have engaged in an insurrection.
In one of the rare occasions when the definition of insurrection was addressed, Alito asked whether a president who sought federal funds for a country the United States considers an enemy could have engaged in an insurrection.
He appeared to examine the difficulty of determining what constitutes an insurrection and whether the process could be open to abuse. At least a republican suggested that President Joe Biden may have violated Section 3 by failing to secure the border.
The Colorado Supreme Court ruled in December that Trump could be barred from the Republican primary ballot, but put the decision on hold while he appealed.
The case would have broad implications if Trump loses, as other states could follow suit, putting obstacles in the way of his bid to win back the presidency this fall. Government officials in conservative-controlled governments have also warned that they may seek to remove Biden from the ballot in response.
Trump, who has often attended recent court hearings in the various civil and criminal cases in which he is involved, was not present in the courtroom Thursday.
“It’s unfortunate that we’re dealing with something like this. I consider it election interference on the part of the Democrats,” Trump later told reporters, adding that he had followed the arguments.
The legal challenge was filed on behalf of six Colorado residents, including four Republicans, by the left-leaning government watchdog group. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and two law firms.
They allege in court documents that Trump “intentionally organized and incited a violent mob to attack the United States Capitol in a desperate attempt to prevent the counting of electoral votes cast against him.”
Trump’s lawyers offered several reasons for dismissing the lawsuit. They argue that the president is not an officer of the United States, that Trump did not engage in insurrection, and that only Congress can enforce Article 3.
The conservative majority includes three justices – Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett – appointed by Trump. Another conservative, Justice Clarence Thomas, has faced scrutiny for his involvement in the case due to the role of his wife, conservative political activist Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, in supporting the challenge. election results by Trump. Some Democrats had asked Thomas to recuse oneself.
Despite the conservative majority of the Court, it has regularly inflicted losses on Trump since he left office.
Interest in the Colorado case increased when Maine’s top election official concluded that Trump was also ineligible to participate in the Republican primary vote in that state. As with the Colorado dispute, that case has been put on hold, meaning Trump remains on the ballot in both states for now.
The Supreme Court is hearing the Colorado case on an accelerated schedule, and a decision is expected within weeks. Colorado is one of more than a dozen states who hold their primary elections on March 5.
