Understanding the 14th Amendment: Trump's Disqualification Trial in Colorado
Former President Trump faces a historic trial in Denver to determine if the 14th Amendment's 'insurrectionist ban' disqualifies him from Colorado's presidential ballot in 2024 This longshot case could have significant implications for his political future
The trial to assess if the "insurrectionist ban" of the 14th Amendment is applicable to former President Donald Trump is scheduled to commence in Denver on Monday. This historic yet improbable case has the potential to prevent him from being included on Colorado's presidential ballot in 2024. Six Colorado voters, consisting of both Republicans and unaffiliated individuals, initiated the lawsuit in early September. They are supported by a liberal watchdog group called Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). Their argument is based on Trump's involvement in the insurrection that occurred on January 6, 2021, and aims to disqualify him from holding the presidency once again.
The challengers have achieved a succession of pretrial triumphs, surpassing expectations by successfully countering numerous motions made by Trump and the Colorado GOP to dismiss the case.
The bench trial, set to take place in Colorado District Court, is anticipated to span at least one week. Trump is unlikely to be present. He has refuted any wrongdoing in relation to January 6, and his campaign has argued that the challengers are distorting the law extensively.
"This is the initial domino that has toppled. We have not encountered a challenge of this magnitude to a candidate running for president, with hearings spanning several days to assess their suitability," stated Derek Muller, an expert in election law at Notre Dame Law School. Muller submitted a brief in a related case that remained impartial regarding disqualifying Trump, but provided analysis on crucial legal matters.
"This lawsuit is not without substance, yet it is not a guaranteed success," Muller further emphasized.
What does the 14th Amendment say?
After the Civil War, the 14th Amendment was ratified, establishing that individuals in the United States who have taken an oath to uphold the Constitution are barred from holding future office if they have taken part in an insurrection or have provided support to insurrectionists.
The ban on holding office mentioned in the Constitution lacks details on its enforcement and has only been utilized twice since the 1800s, specifically against former Confederates.
Section 3 of the amendment, which is crucial, states: "No individual shall... occupy any position... within the United States... if they have previously sworn an oath... to uphold the Constitution of the United States and have been involved in a rebellion or insurrection against it, or have provided assistance or support to its enemies."
What is the trial about?
The challengers filed a lawsuit against Jena Griswold, the Secretary of State for Colorado. Their objective is to obtain a court order prohibiting Griswold from including Trump's name on both the GOP primary and general election ballot in Colorado. Griswold, a Democrat, has not expressed a stance regarding Trump's disqualification and has stated that she will comply with the judge's instructions.
Colorado Judge Sarah Wallace clarified several important trial questions:
1. How do we define "engaged" and "insurrection"?
2. Did Trump participate in an insurrection?
3. Is the ban on insurrectionists automatically enforced, or does Congress need to intervene before disqualifying a candidate?
4. Does Griswold, in accordance with Colorado law, have the authority to exclude a candidate from the ballot based on federal constitutional considerations?
5. Does the ban apply to US presidents exclusively, or does it extend to other officials as well?
How is Trump fighting back?
At his campaign rallies, Trump has scoffed at the lawsuit. His legal team and advisors have contended that it would be against the principles of American democracy to deny voters the chance to determine whether the former president should be allowed to seek re-election by excluding him from the ballot.
Trump's lawyers contended, without success, that the lawsuit misinterpreted Colorado's ballot access laws and posed a "political question" within Congress's purview. Moreover, they argued that it infringed upon his right to free speech. "The intention of this litigation is to hinder President Trump's candidacy and deprive Colorado voters of the chance to vote for him," stated Trump's legal team in a recent court submission.
Why is this happening now?
"There is no legal justification in the Colorado statute to prevent a presidential candidate from running based on the Fourteenth Amendment. Furthermore, it is important to note that President Trump did not endorse or encourage any acts of violence on January 6, 2021."
CREW filed a lawsuit in September, seeking a swift resolution to the dispute before Colorado's GOP primary on March 5, known as Super Tuesday. Wallace desires to render a judgment by Thanksgiving, enabling Colorado's appeals courts sufficient time to review the case and render their own verdict.
Whats the big picture?
Griswold has emphasized the urgency of reaching a resolution in the case by January 5th. It is mandated that her office certifies the names of all candidates to be included on the primary ballot for March 5th by this deadline.
This is one of several lawsuits filed in battleground states seeking to remove Trump from the ballot. Additional challenges have been filed in Minnesota and Michigan by other advocacy groups.
Although the groups initiating these lawsuits lean towards a liberal ideology, many of the plaintiffs themselves are Republicans. Norma Anderson, a former Republican state legislator who held the position of majority leader in both the Colorado House and Senate, serves as the lead plaintiff in Colorado.
A rising number of constitutional experts, including prominent conservative jurists and legal scholars, have supported the challengers' argument against Trump. However, significant disagreements persist regarding the application of the 14th Amendment to Trump and the practical implementation of the ban. It is unclear whether the responsibility lies with election officials, Congress, or the court, due to constitutional ambiguities. It is widely anticipated that the Supreme Court, with its conservative supermajority, will ultimately make a decision on this matter.
Has this happened before?
This is an unprecedented situation in history. No previous US president has attempted to overturn an election, as Trump did. Applying the "insurrectionist ban" of the 14th Amendment to a presidential candidate, especially one who is leading in the GOP polls like Trump, would be unheard of.
CREW filed a lawsuit that resulted in the successful removal of a New Mexico county commissioner, who was a convicted January 6 rioter, from office last year on 14th Amendment grounds.
Who is the Colorado judge?
Meanwhile, the official had already received a conviction for an offense connected to January 6. Trump, on the other hand, is currently dealing with both state and federal charges in relation to the Capitol riot and his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. However, he has entered a plea of not guilty and has yet to face trial.
Wallace was appointed to the bench by Colorado Governor Jared Polis, a Democrat, in the previous year. He mentioned that Wallace would be filling a vacancy that arose in January of this year.
Before this appointment, Wallace served as a partner at Ballard Spahr, a prominent law firm. Her areas of expertise included commercial litigation, breach-of-contract cases, and employment law.
She graduated from the University of Colorado Law School in 1999.
