DENVER (AP) — In an unprecedented move, the Colorado Supreme Court has disqualified former President Donald Trump from the state’s presidential primary ballot, citing the U.S. Constitution’s insurrection clause. This decision paves the way for a potential legal battle in the nation’s highest court to determine whether the GOP front-runner can remain in the race.
The 4-3 decision by the court, whose justices were appointed by Democratic governors, marks the first time Section 3 of the 14th Amendment has been utilized to disqualify a presidential candidate. The court held that Trump is ineligible for the presidency under this constitutional provision.
The Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling overturns a previous decision by a district court judge who acknowledged Trump’s role in inciting the January 6th attack on the Capitol but concluded that the insurrection clause did not pertain to the presidency. However, the Colorado Supreme Court disagreed and ordered Trump’s removal from the state’s presidential primary ballot.
The court has stayed its decision until January 4th or until the U.S. Supreme Court weighs in on the matter. Trump’s legal team has committed to appealing any disqualification immediately to the nation’s highest court, which holds final authority on constitutional issues. The campaign is currently working on a response to the ruling.
While Trump lost Colorado by a significant margin in the 2020 election, this decision carries broader implications. If other courts and election officials follow Colorado’s lead, Trump may face exclusion from crucial states in the upcoming presidential election.
Colorado officials emphasize the need to resolve the issue by January 5th, which is the deadline for printing the state’s presidential primary ballots.
Numerous lawsuits have been filed across the country to disqualify Trump under Section 3, a provision enacted after the Civil War to bar former Confederates from holding office. This provision applies to individuals who took an oath to support the Constitution and subsequently engaged in insurrection or rebellion against it.
The Colorado case stands as the first successful implementation of Section 3 against a presidential candidate. In a weeklong hearing in November, District Judge Sarah B. Wallace found that Trump had indeed incited insurrection, but her ruling maintained his place on the ballot based on a technicality.
Trump’s attorneys argued that the language in Section 3, which refers to officers of the United States taking an oath to support the Constitution, excludes the president. They contended that because the president is not explicitly listed as an officer of the United States and takes a different oath, Section 3 does not apply.
However, the Colorado Supreme Court disagreed with this interpretation, siding with attorneys representing six Colorado Republican and unaffiliated voters. They argued that it would be illogical for the framers of the amendment to exclude former Confederates from low-level office while allowing them to assume the highest office in the land.
Attorney Jason Murray, representing the voters, asserted during the court proceedings that denying former rebels the opportunity to serve as county sheriffs while permitting them to become president defies reason.
The Colorado Supreme Court’s decision will likely have significant ramifications as the legal battle moves forward. With the stakes high, the nation’s highest court may ultimately determine whether Trump can continue his pursuit of the presidency.
(Copyright (c) 2023 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)
