Fri. Apr 12th, 2024

Supreme Court rules states can’t kick Trump off the ballot

By 37ci3 Mar4,2024



WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court On Monday, it won a major victory by ruling that former President Donald Trump cannot be removed from state ballots for his actions that led to the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol — swiftly ending a case with far-reaching implications for the 2024 election. .

A court with no dissent in an unsigned judgment Overturned the Colorado Supreme Court ruling that Trump was ineligible to serve as president under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.

The provision prohibits the nomination of persons who previously worked in government positions, but later “joined the uprising” for various positions.

The court said the Colorado Supreme Court erred in holding that states can determine the ineligibility of a presidential candidate or other candidate for federal office.

The decision makes it clear that Congress, not the states, should set the rules for how the 14th Amendment applies to federal office seekers. So the decision applies not only to Colorado, but to all states. States reserve the power under section 3 to bar candidates for public office from appearing on the ballot.

“Because the Constitution makes Congress, not the states, responsible for applying Section 3 to all federal officeholders and candidates, we strike it down,” he said.

By deciding the case on that legal question, the court avoided any analysis or determination of whether Trump’s actions constituted sedition.

The decision comes a day before the Colorado primary.

Minutes after the verdict, Trump hailed the decision in capital letters on his social media page and wrote, “Big win for America!!!” wrote.

Follow live updates on the Trump Supreme Court decision

In addition to keeping Trump on the ballot in Colorado, the decision will put an end to similar cases that have arisen. So far, only two other states, Maine and Illinois, have followed Colorado’s lead. Like the Colorado decision, both decisions were stayed.

In a statement, Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold acknowledged that the court had ruled that “states do not have the authority to apply Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to federal candidates.” According to this decision, Donald Trump is a suitable candidate for the 2024 presidential election in the state of Colorado.

Maine Secretary of State Shanna Bellows quickly followed suit, saying in a statement: “In accordance with my oath and commitment to uphold the law and the Constitution, and in accordance with the Anderson decision, I am withdrawing my decision that Mr. Trump’s primary petition is invalid. .”

The Supreme Court’s ruling removes a way to hold Trump accountable for his role in the 2020 election protests, including his call for supporters to march on the Capitol on Jan. 6 as Congress prepares to declare Joe Biden’s victory.

Trump has been criminally prosecuted for the same behavior. In April, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on his extensive lawsuit presidential immunity.

The ruling warned of the dangers of a series of rulings that could throw elections into chaos across the country if state officials have the freedom to determine who can run for president.

“The result may be that, based on the same conduct, a single candidate may be declared ineligible in some states and not in others,” the ruling said.

While the resulting vote was unanimous, the court, with a 6-3 conservative majority, was divided on how the case was handled. The three liberal justices — Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson — complained in a co-authored concurring opinion that the court made more decisions than necessary by explaining how Section 3 can be invoked by Congress.

They said the ruling could “insulate” Trump from “future controversy,” adding that the ruling “closes the door on other potential federal enforcement” of Section 3.

Conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett disagreed with the liberal justices, but agreed that the court had gone further than required.

Barrett said that while there was some disagreement with the reasoning, liberals “shouldn’t fuel the controversy” over such a political charge.

“All nine judges agree with the outcome of this case. This is the message Americans should take home,” he added.

The Colorado trial is scheduled for December 19 judgment In section 3, enacted after the Civil War to prevent former Confederates from regaining power in the US government.

The case raised several new legal issues, including whether the language applies to presidential candidates and who decides whether someone is engaged in sedition.

He canceled the decision of the State Supreme Court a decision of the lower court where a judge said Trump engaged in sedition by inciting the January 6 riots, but that presidents are not subject to the 14th Amendment’s sedition clause because they are not “officers of the United States.”

Trump and his allies have raised this issue as well as other arguments that the 14th Amendment is unenforceable. They also claimed that January 6 was not an uprising.

Including Republicans Trump’s main opponents, widely supported the claim that any attempt to remove him from the ballot was a form of partisan election interference. There are also some Democrats, including California Governor Gavin Newsom expressed concern On using the 14th Amendment as a guerilla weapon.

The original lawsuit was filed by a left-leaning government watchdog group on behalf of six Colorado voters. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and two law firms.

They alleged 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.”

Colorado is one more than ten States with primaries on Tuesday.



Source link

By 37ci3

Related Post

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *