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

  • @TheAlbatross@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    1385 months ago

    Surely this will be challenged, and I’m not optimistic about the federal Supreme Court maintaining the same decision, but, fuck, would that be nice.

    • Flying Squid
      link
      fedilink
      1075 months ago

      SCOTUS could decline to take it up. Remember, they were not interested in entertaining Trump’s election fraud claims.

      • @Telorand@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        46
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        They also have typically demurred to “states’ rights.” It was a violation of Colorado’s Constitution, so I agree that it’s less than likely they’ll rule in his favor on appeal.

        Edit: it was ruled as violating the US Constitution. But I still stand by what I said.

          • @jonne@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            14
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Yeah, I can’t believe so many people are still fooled by their ‘originalism’ story. The originalists have just the most radical interpretations of the law that have no relation to the wording it intent of those that wrote it. Biggest example of that is how they interpret the second amendment.

            And also the continual hollowing out of the fourth. The founders would be shocked to see what police can legally do these days (and if they do something illegal, there’s still no consequences, because the people in charge of enforcing the law are apparently the only ones where ignorance of the law is an excuse).

        • FuglyDuck
          link
          fedilink
          English
          13
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          also, the feds don’t decide who goes on the ballots- that’s a state matter. They run the elections. It’ll probably come before SCOTUS only if trump actually wins the regular election.

          similar to how, a state can send a congressperson to congress that’s ineligible, but they get kicked out on day one.

            • FuglyDuck
              link
              fedilink
              English
              25 months ago

              is it the London or Brooklyn bridge? I had my eye on the London Bridge for the longest time.

                • FuglyDuck
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  35 months ago

                  Isn’t thst the point of arches? Always falling and nowhere to go, so they’re strong and can hold up heavy…. Uh… stuff?

        • @jonne@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          85 months ago

          They only care about “states’ rights” if it suits them. They’re completely happy to trample on the state’s right to regulate other things they don’t like.

      • @TheAlbatross@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        305 months ago

        Some of the articles note that Trump wouldn’t need Colorado to win (and didnt win in 2020) and while this sets a wonderful precedent, I’d wager that most would-be-Red-voting states simply wouldn’t recognize this decision.

        In that light, this seems a little bit of a hollow victory, but maybe I’m wrong and this is the precipice of something far better.

        • Flying Squid
          link
          fedilink
          435 months ago

          I suggested elsewhere in the thread that it opens the door to other challenges in other states and that his primary opponents are probably looking into the idea since it’s the only chance they have. Maybe it wouldn’t work in the redder states, but in purple states?

        • TechyDad
          link
          fedilink
          95 months ago

          True, but this removes him from the primary. If enough other states do this, you could have Nikki Haley or someone else winning that state. Then again, Colorado’s primary takes place on Super Tuesday (March 5th). By the time, Haley is announced the winner, it would likely be too late to stop Trump. (Assuming nothing else stops him first.)

    • Jaysyn
      link
      fedilink
      395 months ago

      Current SCotUS is hella corrupt, but I don’t see them denying that the individual States control their own elections.

      • @xantoxis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        155 months ago

        The Jan. 4th deadline isn’t that meaningful. The ballots don’t even exist yet, so striking him from the ballots on January 4th isn’t actually possible.

        The more interesting deadline is not Jan. 4 nor Mar. 5 (the primary election date), but February 12, 2024 because this is when mail-in ballots will be sent. No changes at that point.

        • @Chef@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          65 months ago

          Colorado deadline to submit primary candidates for the ballots is January 5th - one day after the deadline.

          • @xantoxis@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            45 months ago

            Yes and that might be important but I think the court could be persuaded to permit a candidate to be added if a higher court ruled that it was constitutionally required. That’s why I think Feb. 12 is the real goal line.

            • @Chef@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              65 months ago

              Ah I understand the logic now. The “practical” deadline is essentially when the ballots must be created and mailed. Got it.

              • TimLovesTech
                link
                fedilink
                English
                45 months ago

                Those ballots need to be created before they can be addressed/mailed. All that takes time, and thus the January 5th deadline. Once the process has started I don’t think it’s practical to scrap ballots and start over.

                • @nickhammes@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  45 months ago

                  The real hard deadline is probably between the two, if a SCOTUS opinion dropped on February 11th, it’s probably too late to correct, but if it came in January 6th, they’d probably make a good faith effort to correct it if necessary.

                  • TimLovesTech
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    25 months ago

                    Yeah, in good faith I could see them doing it, but I think legally they could just say “to late”.

    • @Nobody@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      115 months ago

      It’s not impossible. This court is extremely right wing and pro-Republican, but some justices are also fanatically religious. And a lot of religious conservatives are souring on the “Trump as orange Jesus” thing, especially educated ones.

      If they rule on it fairly quickly, the GOP could still field a religious candidate that shares the justices’ beliefs.

    • @ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      10
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      It would lead to a lot of terror attacks in the US, a much larger insurrection attempt, and ruin the Republican Party

      The Supreme Court would never put justice above their own interests