If other states come to the same conclusion, Trump will find it difficult — if not impossible — to secure the Republican nomination and win in November.
It is certain that the decision will be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, but it will be up to the justices to decide whether or not to take up the case. Scholars have said only the nation’s high court can decide for all states whether the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol constituted an insurrection and whether Trump is barred from running.
“The majority of the court finds that President Trump is disqualified from serving as President under Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States,” the decision states. “Because he is disqualified, it would be an unlawful act under the Election Code for the Colorado Secretary of State to register him as a candidate in the presidential primary ballot.”
U.S. Supreme Court justices are separately considering a request from special counsel Jack Smith to expedite review of Trump’s request for immunity in one of his criminal cases – his federal indictment in Washington for illegally attempting to obstruct President Biden’s 2020 election victory. Trump has denied any wrongdoing.
The Colorado Supreme Court The majority determined that the trial judge was authorized to review Congress’ investigation into the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, leading to a determination that Trump engaged in an insurrection.
“We conclude that the above evidence, the vast majority of which was not challenged at trial, established that President Trump engaged in an insurrection,” the majority wrote.
Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung called the decision “completely wrong” and said the campaign would appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
“We are fully confident that the Supreme Court will quickly rule in our favor and finally put an end to these anti-American lawsuits,” he said in a statement.
In its ruling, the Colorado Supreme Court said it was suspending the ruling until Jan. 4 and would keep that stay in effect if an appeal is filed with the U.S. Supreme Court. That means Trump’s name could be placed on the ballot while the case is pending. Colorado is one of more than a dozen states expected to hold primaries on March 5, also known as Super Tuesday.
Derek Muller, a law professor at the University of Notre Dame who has studied cases challenging Trump’s candidacy, called Colorado’s decision unprecedented in history.
“No candidate has ever been excluded from the ballot for engaging in an insurrection, much less a presidential candidate, much less a former president,” he said. “So it’s just extraordinary.”
This decision puts intense pressure on the U.S. Supreme Court to act. A blanket ruling from the high court would solve the problem for all states.
“This sounds like the kind of case the Supreme Court needs to rule on,” Muller said.
In the short term, Colorado’s decision could influence courts and election officials in other states, he said. Other states have not yet taken such a step, but might be willing to do so now that Colorado has acted, he said.
Three years after the end of the Civil War, the nation passed the 14th Amendment in 1868, granting citizenship to those born or naturalized in the United States and guaranteeing civil rights to all Americans, including those who had been reduced to slavery. Additionally, Section 3 of the amendment prohibited individuals from holding office if they took an oath to the Constitution and then engaged in insurrection. This measure was intended to prevent former Confederates from returning to power.
Six Republican and independent voters in Colorado invoked the provision in a lawsuit this fall aimed at blocking Trump from participating in the election. After a weeklong trial, Denver District Judge Sarah B. Wallace in November ruled that Trump had engaged in an insurrection but could remain on the ballot because it determined that Section 3 does not apply to those presidential candidate.
Voters appealed the part of the decision that kept him on the ballot, while Trump appealed the part that concluded he had engaged in an insurrection.
The Colorado Supreme Court upheld much of Wallace’s findings, but overturned his decision on key points by holding that Section 3 applied to the presidency.
“We do not reach these conclusions lightly,” the majority wrote. “We are aware of the scale and weight of the questions that now confront us. We are also conscious of our solemn duty to enforce the law, without fear or favor, and without being influenced by public reaction to the decisions the law requires us to make.
Article 3 prohibits those who engage in insurrection from holding office and does not mention who can run for office. The majority rejected the idea that this meant the state could not exclude from the ballot candidates who did not meet the requirements to serve as president, such as being at least 35 years old and a U.S. citizen.
“This would mean that the State would be powerless to exclude a twenty-eight-year-old, a nonresident of the United States, or even a foreign national, from the presidential primary ballot in Colorado,” the majority wrote.
The case was brought with the help of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. The group’s president, Noah Bookbinder, said the decision was “not only historic and justified, but necessary to protect the future of democracy in our country.”
The three dissenters cited different reasons for their disagreement with the majority. One would have dismissed the case because Trump was not charged with insurrection, the other would have dismissed the case because Trump was not convicted of a crime and the third would not believe that the court had the authority to decide the issue under the state election code.
Vivek Ramaswamywho is running against Trump for the Republican nomination, said in a statement to the Washington Post: “I am committed to withdrawing from the Colorado GOP primary ballot until Trump is also allowed to appear on the ballot , and I demand that Ron DeSantis, Chris Christieand Nikki Haley to do the same immediately – or else they tacitly approve of this illegal maneuver which will have disastrous consequences for our country.”
“I don’t believe a court should stop Donald Trump from being president of the United States,” Christie told a crowd gathered Tuesday at New Hampshire City Hall. “I think it would be bad for the country” if that happened, and “I think it would cause a lot of anger” if that choice were taken away, he said.
Christie said he had not read the ruling, but said it was inappropriate to punish Trump for inciting insurrection on Jan. 6 without having a criminal trial on the issue.
In separate cases, the Minnesota Supreme Court and a Michigan appeals court previously refused to remove Trump’s name from the primary ballot in those states. Meanwhile, a Texas tax advisor got no results with a series of lawsuits he filed on this issue.
