Judge rules Trump engaged in insurrection but must stay on Colorado ballot
Colorado judge denies removal of Donald Trump from 2024 primary ballot, rejecting claims of constitutional disqualification due to January 6 insurrection
A Colorado judge has denied an effort to exclude former President Donald Trump from the state's 2024 primary ballot, stating that the claim suggesting his constitutional ineligibility due to the January 6, 2021, insurrection lacks merit. The ruling, delivered by Colorado District Judge Sarah Wallace last Friday, aligns with previous decisions by judges in Minnesota and Michigan who have also rejected the removal of Trump from Republican primary ballots in their states.
Despite having the support of well-funded advocacy groups, these three prominent challenges against Trump have not succeeded in removing him from any ballot as the fast-approaching 2024 primary season looms. Wallace determined that although Trump was involved in an insurrection on January 6, 2021, through incitement, the "insurrectionist ban" of the 14th Amendment does not apply to presidents. Additionally, she found that Trump's speech is not protected under the First Amendment.
Fani Willis, the District Attorney of Fulton County, addressed the media at the Fulton County Government building in Atlanta, Georgia on August 14, 2023. A grand jury indictment was handed down today, accusing former President Donald Trump and his Republican allies of an alleged effort to overturn the state's 2020 election results. The photograph captures this momentous event. (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)
Joe Raedle/Getty Images
Fulton County prosecutors want Trump Georgia election subversion trial to begin in August 2024
The 14th Amendment, which was ratified after the Civil War, prohibits American officials who have taken an oath to support the Constitution from holding future office if they have participated in insurrection. However, the Constitution does not specify how to enforce this ban, and it has only been implemented on two occasions since 1919. Consequently, many experts consider these lawsuits to have low chances of success.
This provision explicitly bars insurrectionists from serving as US senators, representatives, and even presidential electors. However, it does not mention the presidency itself. Instead, it applies to "any office, civil or military, under the United States." Based on this interpretation, Wallace concluded that the office of the presidency is not covered by this provision.
"After thorough consideration of the arguments from both viewpoints, the Court is convinced that the officers of the United States do not encompass the President of the United States," she expressed. "It is evident to the Court that, for unknown motives, the creators of Section Three did not have the intention of including an individual who had solely taken the Presidential Oath."
Legal experts anticipate that these cases will eventually reach the US Supreme Court in some capacity. However, before that happens, the Republican Party and independent voters who initiated the Colorado lawsuit, in collaboration with a progressive monitoring organization, may potentially file an appeal to the Colorado Supreme Court as a preliminary step.
Trump engaged in an insurrection
In her ruling, Wallace determined that Trump was involved in the insurrection on January 6th as he instigated his supporters to assault the US Capitol. However, she clarified that the president is not subject to the 14th Amendment's prohibition on insurrectionists holding public office.
The Court determines that the Petitioners have successfully proven that on January 6, 2021, Trump committed an act of insurrection through incitement, and that his speech is not protected by the First Amendment," Wallace stated. He was referring to the rally held at the Ellipse on the morning of January 6.
Wallace also expressed that this inflammatory language, coming from someone who consistently endorsed political violence and had intensified the frustration of his followers leading up to the certification, was highly likely to provoke immediate lawlessness and chaos.
Former President Donald Trump leaves the stage at a campaign rally Saturday, Nov. 11, 2023, in Claremont, N.H.
Reba Saldanha/AP
Trump to remain on Michigan ballot after judge rejects another 14th Amendment challenge
Trump's campaign dismisses these lawsuits as baseless efforts to obstruct his office bid. They view it as an unfounded conspiracy theory aimed at preventing him from assuming office, despite his strong lead in the GOP primary and favorable performance in head-to-head polls against President Joe Biden. "We commend the recent ruling in Colorado, which further debunks these un-American attempts to challenge the legitimacy of the ballots," stated Trump's spokesperson Steven Cheung. He emphasized that American voters are constitutionally entitled to vote for their preferred candidate, with President Donald J. Trump currently enjoying overwhelming support.
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, the organization linked to the Colorado case, failed to prevail against Trump. However, they did manage to implement the "insurrectionist ban" last year, resulting in the removal of a convicted January 6 rioter from a New Mexico county commission.
Apart from the disqualification endeavors, Trump is currently facing both state and federal criminal charges related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. Despite the accusations, he has pleaded not guilty.
During an interview with CNN's Erin Burnett on Friday evening, Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold expressed her belief that "big contentious issues" should be resolved by the judicial system, emphasizing the importance of this approach in the functioning of the country. Griswold stated that regardless of whether Trump is included in the ballot or not, she considers him to be a threat to American democracy. She further criticized the former president's claims that the case constituted election interference, dismissing them as a continuation of his deceptive narrative regarding the state of democracy in the United States.
Griswold refrained from expressing a stance on the case, but anticipates that the decision will undergo the appeals process. She affirms her commitment to abiding by the prevailing judicial ruling at the time of ballot certification during the upcoming primary elections next year.
Historic disqualification trial
The Trump case in Colorado centered on his track record of fueling political unrest, openly urging supporters to gather in Washington, DC for a disruptive protest on January 6th, and directing them to aggressively "fight like hell" at the Capitol to prevent the certification of Biden's win. Challengers firmly believed that these actions constituted "engaging in insurrection" against the US Constitution, as required by Section 3 of the 14th Amendment for disqualification.
During the weeklong bench trial, US Capitol Police officers who were injured while defending against the pro-Trump mob on January 6 provided firsthand accounts. Additionally, video clips of Trump's inflammatory speech prior to the riot and testimony from an expert in right-wing extremism revealed that groups such as the Proud Boys interpreted Trump's words as a incitement to violence. In his closing arguments on Wednesday, attorney Sean Grimsley, representing the challengers, emphasized that regardless of his popularity in polls, the Constitution does not permit Trump to be reinstated to office.
Video Ad Feedback
Newly released audio reveals Trump's words about January 6 crowd
03:00
- Source:
CNN
"Our founders have repeatedly emphasized that the Constitution takes precedence over a candidate's popularity," stated Grimsley. "The principle of the rule of law should be applied consistently, regardless of a candidate's chances of winning or their position as a potential frontrunner. The urgency of applying Section 3 is heightened when an individual, who has blatantly disregarded their commitment to uphold the Constitution, seeks the highest office in the nation."
Witnesses called by Trump's legal team affirmed their efforts to prevent violence on that day and testified to Trump's authorization of National Guard troops to safeguard Washington D.C. on January 6th.
Even prior to the trial, they unsuccessfully contended that the case should be dismissed because the accusations against Trump largely relied on his pre-riot speech, which they argued was safeguarded by the First Amendment and did not meet the legal criteria for incitement of violence.
In his opening statement at the trial, Trump's lawyer Scott Gessler asserted, "They are fabricating the criteria to suit the circumstances of January 6. Trump did not brandish a pitchfork on the Capitol premises, he did not lead an assault, he did not engage in physical altercations with lawmakers, but rather delivered a speech appealing for peaceful and patriotic participation in a protest at the Capitol."
The trial served as a significant opportunity to delve into the events of the Civil War, the Reconstruction era, the debate surrounding the drafting and ratification of the 14th Amendment, and the interpretation of its insurrectionist ban. Professor Gerard Magliocca, a distinguished legal expert from Indiana University, provided testimony in support of the removal of Trump from the ballot. He highlighted the disqualification of numerous Confederates from holding office, regardless of whether they actively participated in the war or not. This even included a congressman-elect who expressed support for violence against Union troops solely through a letter-to-the-editor.
The provision states, in part: "No individual may hold any position under the United States if they have previously taken an oath to support the Constitution of the United States, but have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against it, or have provided assistance or support to its enemies."
Note: The updated story includes new information.
