The 4-3 ruling, which rests on an interpretation of the 14th Amendment, will almost certainly force the issue to the U.S. Supreme Court to resolve whether Trump, the leading candidate for the Republican nomination, is eligible to hold future public office.
The Colorado court ruled that Trump cannot appear on the state’s presidential ballot next year, but the ruling will not take effect immediately to give Trump time to appeal.
“We do not reach these conclusions lightly,” the Colorado majority opinion reads. “We are mindful of the magnitude and weight of the questions now before us. We are likewise mindful of our solemn duty to apply the law, without fear or favor, and without being swayed by public reaction to the decisions that the law mandates we reach.”
The court, which consists entirely of Democratic appointees, is the first in the nation to side with activists and voters who have filed numerous lawsuits around the country claiming that Trump is barred from office under the 14th Amendment’s “insurrection clause.” That clause states that anyone who “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” after taking an oath of office to support the Constitution is forbidden from holding any public office.
The divided decision, issued just two weeks after the court heard oral arguments in the case, reverses a Denver judge’s ruling that found that while Trump had engaged in insurrection, the Constitution’s ambiguity on the matter left Trump eligible to remain on the ballot. The four-justice majority of the Colorado high court agreed that Trump engaged in insurrection — and found that he is disqualified from the ballot as a result.
Moments after the ruling, Trump vowed to appeal it to the Supreme Court.
“The Colorado Supreme Court issued a completely flawed decision tonight and we will swiftly file an appeal to the United States Supreme Court and a concurrent request for a stay of this deeply undemocratic decision,” said Steven Cheung, a spokesman for Trump’s campaign. “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.”
The Colorado Supreme Court’s decision won’t take effect until at least Jan. 4, 2024, to give the U.S. Supreme Court time to weigh in.
The U.S. Supreme Court is already debating whether to take up another momentous Trump-related question on an urgent timeframe: whether he is immune from the criminal charges brought by special counsel Jack Smith related to Trump’s bid to subvert the 2020 election. If it takes up the Colorado case as well, it would put the justices in a position to decide two issues that could determine the trajectory of the entire 2024 presidential election.
The Colorado decision is an extraordinary ruling that rests on Trump’s months-long campaign to sow doubt about the 2020 election results — even before votes were cast — and stoke disinformation about the outcome of the election even though his top advisers and government officials warned him there was no evidence of significant voter fraud.
Trump’s rhetoric ginned up far-right extremists, the court concluded, many of whom came to Washington prepared for violence before Trump ultimately told them to go to the Capitol and “fight like hell.”
“President Trump did not merely incite the insurrection. Even when the siege on the Capitol was fully underway, he continued to support it,” the majority wrote. “These actions constituted overt, voluntary, and direct participation in the insurrection.”
The Colorado case is one of dozens around the country that are challenging Trump’s eligibility to run for president by arguing that he is disqualified by section 3 of the 14th Amendment. Other courts have rejected the challenges on various grounds, but the Colorado court’s ruling all but guarantees that the U.S. Supreme Court will have to weigh in.
And they may need to do so quickly. The Colorado court noted that election officials in the state must certify the primary ballot by Jan. 5, 2024 — 60 days ahead of the state’s planned Super Tuesday primary on March 5.
Practically, election officials need time to print and mail ballots to voters ahead of the primary. Federal law requires mail ballots be sent to military and overseas voters at least 45 days before an election — creating a particularly compressed timeline for the U.S. Supreme Court to step in.
The 133-page opinion, which was unsigned and issued by the four justices in the majority, drew three dissents.
Chief Justice John Boatright argued that removing Trump from the ballot would require “an insurrection-related conviction.” Trump was impeached by the House for his role in the Jan. 6 attack, but he was acquitted by the Senate. And while he is facing a slew of federal and state criminal charges stemming from his efforts to subvert the election, he has never been criminally charged with committing or inciting an insurrection.
Justice Carlos Samour echoed Boatright’s concerns but went further, contending that the court was depriving Trump of due process.
“Even if we are convinced that a candidate committed horrible acts in the past — dare I say, engaged in insurrection — there must be procedural due process before we can declare that individual disqualified from holding public office,” he wrote.
Justice Maria Berkenkotter also dissented, arguing that Colorado courts don’t have the authority to consider the question presented by those challenging Trump.
Source: politico.com
Author: Erica Orden, Kyle Cheney and Zach Montellaro
No comments:
Post a Comment