Colorado Supreme Court kicks Trump off ballot

[CharlieH]

 

Colorado's Supreme Court has ruled Donald Trump cannot run for president next year in the state, citing a constitutional insurrection clause.

In a decision that upends the White House race, the court ruled 4-3 that Mr Trump is not an eligible candidate.

It is the first time that Section 3 of the US Constitution's 14th Amendment has been used to disqualify a presidential candidate.

Several attempts to kick Mr Trump off the ballot in other states have failed.

Tuesday's decision - which has been placed on hold pending appeal until next month - does not apply to states outside Colorado.

The top court wrote in its ruling: "We do not reach these conclusions lightly. We are mindful of the magnitude and weight of the questions now before us.

 

"We are likewise mindful of our solemn duty to apply the law, without fear or favor, and without being swayed by public reaction to the decisions that the law mandates we reach."

The decision reverses an earlier one from a Colorado judge, who ruled that the 14th Amendment's insurrection ban did not apply to presidents because the section does not explicitly name them.

That same lower court judge also found that Mr Trump had participated in an insurrection on the day of the US Capitol riot in 2021. Supporters of the former president stormed Congress on that day while lawmakers were certifying President Joe Biden's election victory.

The Colorado Supreme Court's decision does not go into effect until at least 4 January 2024. That is the eve of the deadline for the state to print its presidential primary ballots.

In a statement, Steven Cheung, a spokesman for the Trump campaign, called the ruling "completely flawed" and lambasted the justices, who were all appointed by Democratic governors.

"Democrat Party leaders are in a state of paranoia over the growing, dominant lead President Trump has amassed in the polls," Mr Cheung said.

 

"They have lost faith in the failed Biden presidency and are now doing everything they can to stop the American voters from throwing them out of office next November."

Mr Cheung added that Mr Trump's legal team would "swiftly file an appeal" to the US Supreme Court.

• The legal bid to take Trump off ballot, explained

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (Crew), the group that brought the case, welcomed the ruling.

"It is not only historic and justified, but is necessary to protect the future of democracy in our country," the group's president, Noah Bookbinder, said in a statement.

Similar lawsuits in New Hampshire, Minnesota and Michigan have failed.

The 14th Amendment was ratified after the American Civil War. Its Section 3 was intended to block secessionists from returning to previous government roles once southern states re-joined the Union.

 

It was used against Confederate president Jefferson Davis and his vice-president Alexander Stephens, both of whom had served in Congress. It has seldom been invoked since.

Mr Trump lost the state of Colorado by a wide margin in the last presidential election. But if courts in more competitive states followed suit on Tuesday's ruling, Mr Trump's White House bid could face serious problems.

During a one-week trial in Colorado last month, the former president's lawyers argued he should not be disqualified because he did not bear responsibility for the US Capitol riot.

But in its Tuesday ruling, the Colorado Supreme Court majority disagreed.

They said Mr Trump's messages before the riot were "a call to his supporters to fight and… his supporters responded to that call".

Carlos Samour, one of three justices who dissented, argued the government could not "deprive someone of the right to hold public office without due process of law".

"Even if we are convinced that a candidate committed horrible acts in the past - dare I say, engaged in insurrection - there must be procedural due process before we can declare that individual disqualified from holding public office," he wrote.

 

FULL STORY

 

[Tug]

He he he life is good lol 😂 I would bet money old trump is scheming how he can use this to conn his rubes out of more money lol 😂 anyway he did incite an insurrection no doubt about that it most likely will be struck down on appeal but wouldent it be wonderful if it dident!!

[Morch]

That's should bring about a decent tantrum...

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, Tug said:

He he he life is good lol 😂 I would bet money old trump is scheming how he can use this to conn his rubes out of more money lol 😂 anyway he did incite an insurrection no doubt about that it most likely will be struck down on appeal but wouldent it be wonderful if it dident!!

 

It will most likely will be struck down on appeal because nobody can show that Trump did incite an insurrection.

 

How many times have desperate folks failed to prove that already?

 

 

[Danderman123]

35 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

It will most likely will be struck down on appeal because nobody can show that Trump did incite an insurrection.

 

How many times have desperate folks failed to prove that already?

 

 

Unfortunately,  I agree with you.

 

For the 14th Amendment to apply, a person must have been convicted of sedition. Otherwise, any state court can kick anyone off the ballot, simply by observing that they participated in an insurrection. So, Georgia could kick Joe Biden off the ballot, because they can.

[beautifulthailand99]

It is the right decision but this has the potential to get nasty really quick if he weaponises his many followers to start hassling local and national representatives and legislatures which he will. Time for the deep state if it ever exists to dust off the golden trigger document for use in an emergency.

[scorecard]

2 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

It will most likely will be struck down on appeal because nobody can show that Trump did incite an insurrection.

 

How many times have desperate folks failed to prove that already?

 

 

Naah, not true, he did incite an insurrection. the proof has been on your TV screen a hundred times.

[youreavinalaff]

2 minutes ago, scorecard said:

Naah, not true, he did incite an insurrection. the proof has been on your TV screen a hundred times.

Trial by TV? Interesting.

[ozimoron]

2 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

It will most likely will be struck down on appeal because nobody can show that Trump did incite an insurrection.

 

How many times have desperate folks failed to prove that already?

 

The court did prove Trump engaged in insurrection.

[ozimoron]

2 hours ago, Morch said:

That's should bring about a decent tantrum...

 

I hope it does. The US will finally see who MAGA really are.

[morrobay]

Who cares what these liberal SAPS in colorado* do . Trump is going to lose that state anyway. And win the election. * By the way this is the same states court that let the Ramsey's off https://www.steamboatpilot.com/news/prosecutors-drop-case-in-jonbenet-ramsey-slaying/

[illisdean]

4 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

The court did prove Trump engaged in insurrection.

What trial, in what court (beside your kangaroo court version) was Trump charged, tried, & convicted of insurrection and the due process afforded Trump in your fantasy kangaroo court. Hurry up and embarrass yourself some more here.

 

The US banana republic is bad but not likely devolved to the extent where radical dem controlled  courts select the POTUS and not the voters. Since the deep state fears Trump so much and they know the vegetable in the WH can't beat him in a fair election the desperation is coming out and eroding democracy, a true threat to democracy. 

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, morrobay said:

Who cares what these liberal SAPS in colorado* do . Trump is going to lose that state anyway. And win the election. * By the way this is the same states court that let the Ramsey's off 

 

This is going to the US SC. If they uphold Colorado's decision it's game over.

[ozimoron]

Just now, illisdean said:

What trial, in what court (beside your kangaroo court version) was Trump charged, tried, & convicted of insurrection and the due process afforded Trump in your fantasy kangaroo court. Hurry up and embarrass yourself some more here.

 

The US banana republic is bad but not likely devolved to the extent where radical dem controlled  courts select the POTUS and not the voters. Since the deep state fears Trump so much and they know the vegetable in the WH can't beat him in a fair election the desperation is coming out and eroding democracy, a true threat to democracy. 

 

The decision just made. The Colorado SC is not a kangaroo court regardless of how much you wish it were.

[andersonat]

2 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Unfortunately,  I agree with you.

 

For the 14th Amendment to apply, a person must have been convicted of sedition. Otherwise, any state court can kick anyone off the ballot, simply by observing that they participated in an insurrection. So, Georgia could kick Joe Biden off the ballot, because they can.

 

 

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

 

***

 

Section 3 does *not* mention "conviction". 

 

 

[Purdey]

The dissenting judge may have had a point. Trump has yet to be tried and found guilty of insurrection (everyone says he did it in the court of public opinion), the due process he mentioned. 

Wouldn't it be better to have a federal court trial and found guilty than these state trials? If for instance the  supreme court of the US finds that he didn't create an  insurrection, where would Colorado be then?

 

Just wondering. 

[Skeptic7]

16 minutes ago, andersonat said:

 

 

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

 

***

 

Section 3 does *not* mention "conviction". 

 

 

Checkmate❗And thx for saving me having to show this. Just like their cult leader...they just make 💩 up and run with it. Truly a warped and sickening sad lot of desperados. 

[ozimoron]

5 minutes ago, Purdey said:

The dissenting judge may have had a point. Trump has yet to be tried and found guilty of insurrection (everyone says he did it in the court of public opinion), the due process he mentioned. 

Wouldn't it be better to have a federal court trial and found guilty than these state trials? If for instance the  supreme court of the US finds that he didn't create an  insurrection, where would Colorado be then?

 

Just wondering. 

 

Just wrong. This on November 14th. The only question not then settled was whether the president was included and the Colorado SC just settled that question.

 

A Colorado judge on Friday found that former President Donald Trump engaged in insurrection during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol but rejected an effort to keep him off the state’s primary ballot because it’s unclear whether a Civil War-era Constitutional amendment barring insurrectionists from public office applies to the presidency.

 

https://www.pressherald.com/2023/11/17/colorado-judge-finds-trump-engaged-in-insurrection-but-rejects-constitutional-ballot-challenge/

[morrobay]

12 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

This is going to the US SC. If they uphold Colorado's decision it's game over.

No , read this. ' If Trump takes this to supreme court Colorado keeps him on the ballot https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/19/us/colorado-trump-legal-questions-supreme-court.html

[Georgealbert]

12 minutes ago, illisdean said:

What trial, in what court (beside your kangaroo court version) was Trump charged, tried, & convicted of insurrection and the due process afforded Trump in your fantasy kangaroo court. Hurry up and embarrass yourself some more here.

 

The US banana republic is bad but not likely devolved to the extent where radical dem controlled  courts select the POTUS and not the voters. Since the deep state fears Trump so much and they know the vegetable in the WH can't beat him in a fair election the desperation is coming out and eroding democracy, a true threat to democracy. 

5555 kangaroo court?

 

What you want, only judges picked by your hero Trump?

 

Your so far down that QAnon rabbit hole, you have lost all reality!

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, morrobay said:

No , read this. ' If Trump takes this to supreme court Colorado keeps him on the ballot https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/19/us/colorado-trump-legal-questions-supreme-court.html

 

paywall, please find another link

[newnative]

Yaa!  Good decision.  He is clearly not fit to serve as President.

[Purdey]

2 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

Just wrong. This on November 14th. The only question not then settled was whether the president was included and the Colorado SC just settled that question.

 

A Colorado judge on Friday found that former President Donald Trump engaged in insurrection during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol but rejected an effort to keep him off the state’s primary ballot because it’s unclear whether a Civil War-era Constitutional amendment barring insurrectionists from public office applies to the presidency.

 

https://www.pressherald.com/2023/11/17/colorado-judge-finds-trump-engaged-in-insurrection-but-rejects-constitutional-ballot-challenge/

So you're saying that SCOTUS could find him innocent but the Colorado decision would stand?

 

[OneMoreFarang]

He should be in jail since that January.

But then, the USA and American people were always somehow different.

I hope one day they will all wake up realize what they did. But I am not so sure that will happen anytime soon. 

[Georgealbert]

22 minutes ago, morrobay said:

Who cares what these liberal SAPS in colorado* do . Trump is going to lose that state anyway. And win the election. * By the way this is the same states court that let the Ramsey's off https://www.steamboatpilot.com/news/prosecutors-drop-case-in-jonbenet-ramsey-slaying/

And that link has what to do with this thread? 
 

Prosecutors dropped the case, not the supreme court judges, are you aware of how the justice system works?

 

Pure deflection, just like Trump, throw as much sh#t and hope some sticks.

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, Purdey said:

So you're saying that SCOTUS could find him innocent but the Colorado decision would stand?

 

No, I'm saying a CO state court found him guilty but left him on the ballot because of the question as to whether the constitution applied to the president. The CO SC has just determined that it does and so the courts will now strike him from the ballot. They will obviously withhold in the US SC considers the matter but that won't take long.

 

The ere are wider questions that the US SC will need to answer if they overturn the CO SC. Firstly, why was Nixon pardoned if he has presidential immunity? Second, the SC could never rule that an action taken by the president was illegal for any reason, including questions of constitutionality. Biden could issue all manner of executive orders this next year if the SC decides he has presidential immunity.

[ozimoron]

Whatever transpires when the Supreme Court takes up the case, Aranda-Williams believes there needs to be some serious effort put into the opinions that are generated to meet the moment and set a definitive answer to determine exactly what Trump's role was in the leadup to and on the day of the Jan. 6, 2021 riot at the Capitol.

 

"I think what the American people are owed an opinion that goes to the heart and the merits of the case, which is, one, whether the former president engaged in insurrection against the Constitution.

 

"I think that's what the court has to answer here."

 

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-colorado-ruling-tough-to-overrule/

[ozimoron]

This is game over for Trump.

 

A federal judge ruled Tuesday that Rep. Scott Perry must disclose to federal prosecutors more than 1,600 emails, text messages and other communications related to the investigation into Donald Trump and his allies’ bid to subvert the 2020 election.

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/12/19/scott-perry-ordered-to-disclose-messages-trump-00132623

[Purdey]

3 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

No, I'm saying a CO state court found him guilty but left him on the ballot because of the question as to whether the constitution applied to the president. The CO SC has just determined that it does and so the courts will now strike him from the ballot. They will obviously withhold in the US SC considers the matter but that won't take long.

 

The ere are wider questions that the US SC will need to answer if they overturn the CO SC. Firstly, why was Nixon pardoned if he has presidential immunity? Second, the SC could never rule that an action taken by the president was illegal for any reason, including questions of constitutionality. Biden could issue all manner of executive orders this next year if the SC decides he has presidential immunity.

Thanks for that.

I am interested mainly in what is the ultimate decision-making body for insurrection by a president rather than immunity (though that is related). I assumed there would be a SCOTUS decision eventually.

Yes, the Nixon pardon implied he wasn't immune. 

[morrobay]

20 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

paywall, please find another link