Get 40% Off
These stocks are up over 10% post earnings. Did you spot the buying opportunity? Our AI did.Read how

Colorado Supreme Court weighs Trump ballot disqualification over Jan. 6 attack

Published 12/06/2023, 06:34 AM
Updated 12/06/2023, 06:46 PM
© Reuters. Former U.S. President Donald Trump leaves the courtroom after attending the Trump Organization civil fraud trial, in New York State Supreme Court in the Manhattan borough of New York City, U.S., November 6, 2023. REUTERS/Shannon Stapleton

By Andrew Goudsward

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -Colorado's highest court heard arguments on Wednesday on whether the U.S. Constitution allows former President Donald Trump to be disqualified from the state’s ballot next year over his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Justices on the Colorado Supreme Court focused much of their questioning on whether a constitutional amendment passed after the Civil War that bars public officials from holding federal office if they have engaged in "insurrection" applies to U.S. presidents.

A group of Colorado voters, backed by the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, are challenging Trump’s eligibility to return to the presidency under that amendment, arguing that he incited his supporters to attack the Capitol and that disqualifies him from running for office again.

The Colorado lawsuit has been viewed as a test case for a wider campaign to contest Trump’s 2024 candidacy under the constitutional provision, Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

"If it was so important the president be included, why not spell it out?" Justice Carlos Samour asked, noting that the language of the amendment does not explicitly mention presidents.

Jason Murray, a lawyer for the voters, said it would be "bizarre" to disqualify candidates for lower-level public offices and not the president.

"A rebel who took up arms against the government couldn’t be a county sheriff, but could be the president," Murray said.

Murray said the 14th Amendment was the U.S. Constitution's "self-defense mechanism" against people who pose a danger to the government.

3rd party Ad. Not an offer or recommendation by Investing.com. See disclosure here or remove ads .

A lower court ruling last month found that then-president Trump engaged in insurrection by inciting a mob of his supporters to storm the Capitol in an unsuccessful bid to stop Congress from certifying Democrat Joe Biden's victory in the November 2020 election and obstructing the transfer of power.

But Judge Sarah Wallace allowed Trump to remain on the ballot in the Colorado Republican primary, finding that as president, Trump was not “an officer of the United States” who could be disqualified under the amendment.

Trump, the frontrunner for the 2024 Republican nomination, has asked the state Supreme Court to uphold the ruling allowing him on the ballot. His lawyers have disputed the finding that he engaged in insurrection and argued that courts do not have the authority to bar candidates from the ballot under the constitutional provision.

Trump lawyer Scott Gessler told the court that the Capitol riot was not serious enough to qualify as an "insurrection" and that Trump's speech in Washington on Jan. 6 exhorting his supporters to "fight like hell" was "perfectly consistent with normal patterns of political discourse."

Gessler argued the presidency was not a position the drafters of the amendment intended to be subject to disqualification.

"The president is different," Gessler said, adding that "the natural and comfortable meaning" of the amendment "points toward the president’s exclusion."

Watchdog groups and anti-Trump advocates have brought lawsuits in several states challenging Trump’s eligibility, though courts have so far rejected all attempts to keep Trump off the ballot.

3rd party Ad. Not an offer or recommendation by Investing.com. See disclosure here or remove ads .

Trump’s campaign has called the legal challenges an “un-American” attempt to prevent voters from being able to choose their preferred candidate.

The Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling can be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Latest comments

Turn about.........a verdict in Trump's favor is being appealed.  Nothing personal or political here, though.  Go to the courts to keep mean X comments off the ballot!
Hate him or love him, it would be anti democratic to prevent him to run for presidency when you consider his popularity.Of course the “democrats” would love to eliminate their most fierce adversary!
This case too will be thrown out, just like ALL the frivolous court cases against Trump will eventually die. January 6th wasn’t an insurrection. It was an orchestrated circus, designed to ensnare Trump supporters to enter the Capitol building so that Democrats could hang the ‘insurrectionist’ sign around Trumps’ neck.
Yes, Brandy, it is a c-o-n-s-p-i-r-a-c-y.
So the magaloons say...
funny that the orange messiah, for all the bragging of being a genius, ended up so easily fell for the democrats' trap
I -fight like hell- with many people in the comments section almost daily.  Is that an insurrection against Investing.com??  Maybe later I'll have to march on over to the fox website and start another insurrection over there, too.
 In my small mind Trump told the crowd to march to the House, NOT invade it.  They were supposed to be there to show support for Pence, who Trump thought would do what he (Trump) wanted, but Pence did differently.  I do not blame Pence for doing what he felt was right, but the already fevered crowd was probably further incited by planted insiders that were  feeding the frenzy.  The crowd reacted before thinking of the ramifications.  I'm sure you know all the psychological aspects of crowd mentality pertaining to what I am describing.
You form an opinion that there were planted crowd agitators with zero evidence that will stand up to scrutiny, while failing to accommodate the facts of the wider scheme Trump had hatched for which there is a mountain of evidence.
  Trump's plan was all on Pence, and it failed.  Now show me where he instructed people to break into the Congress building. His -fight like hell- line meant to continue the show of force by continuing the demonstration, not break the law.  Apparently the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers had their own agenda, and it was relatively easy to coerce the crowd into following.  Like you say, though, there is a questionable, (grey area), of whether these groups were planted by others, or possibly there were even additional people in the crowd inciting them.  That will be up to the final interpretation of the film footage.
Lots of folks here at the VFW Hall in Little Rock plan to set up camp at the Drop Boxes in 2024. Don't want any folks putting in a lot of ballots. Big Don gave us the Thumbs Up.
funny the GOP Arkasas governor and AG certified the 2020 election result in that state, clearly they don't seem to think there were anything wrong with the Dropboxes, or maybe they were in the big conspiracy too?
Its 🐂💩
DO IT. AND the new speaker wants to blur the faces in the 6th videos so they won't be prosecuted. I shake my head that people can be this stupid.
George you are right the aliens did it…they left area 51 in busses masked as humans and attacked the capitol. See you at the local Quanon meeting!!
When Trumps lawers bring up the recently released J6 videos with all the FBI informants and cooperation with the Capital police, the Supremes will have no options but to throw out this frivilous lawsuit.
 "Have you seen that the House Reps (once again) are looking into whether or not Jezebel Pelosi intentionally gave orders to NOT call in additional security...."  - house republicans promised to look into all kind of things, most of the time they never follow up from all their big talk, the few times they actually started the investigations they turned up with next to nothing, but hey, maybe this time it would be different, eh?
Pathetic that the Trumpist politicians can so predictably play you magaloons with the same old, never proven conspiracy theories. Lie. Rinse. Repeat.
 of course the MAGA nutjobs' wishful thinking of Pelosi not getting extra security still doesn't change the fact that the Jan-6 protesters still broke the law.....oh and it's obvious that the FBI and antifa infiltrators forced all of them to chant "hang Mike Pence"???
Risk Disclosure: Trading in financial instruments and/or cryptocurrencies involves high risks including the risk of losing some, or all, of your investment amount, and may not be suitable for all investors. Prices of cryptocurrencies are extremely volatile and may be affected by external factors such as financial, regulatory or political events. Trading on margin increases the financial risks.
Before deciding to trade in financial instrument or cryptocurrencies you should be fully informed of the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, carefully consider your investment objectives, level of experience, and risk appetite, and seek professional advice where needed.
Fusion Media would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. The data and prices on the website are not necessarily provided by any market or exchange, but may be provided by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual price at any given market, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. Fusion Media and any provider of the data contained in this website will not accept liability for any loss or damage as a result of your trading, or your reliance on the information contained within this website.
It is prohibited to use, store, reproduce, display, modify, transmit or distribute the data contained in this website without the explicit prior written permission of Fusion Media and/or the data provider. All intellectual property rights are reserved by the providers and/or the exchange providing the data contained in this website.
Fusion Media may be compensated by the advertisers that appear on the website, based on your interaction with the advertisements or advertisers.
© 2007-2024 - Fusion Media Limited. All Rights Reserved.