Wednesday, December 20, 2023

Colorado's Supreme Court rules Trump cannot be on the State's primary ballot because, he is not now qualified for the office of President because, in turn, he engaged in insurrection; per 14th Amendment, sect. 3.

Their procedure was that a trial court held a proceeding where it was held Trump had engaged in insurrection, and being unqualified, he could not have his name put on the primary ballot.

There is a lot to that, including that Trump exceeded limits of free speech by inciting insurrection. 

What this does is present a situation where the U.S. Supreme Court either accepts certiorari or Trump is not a candidate for President, 2024, in Colorado. 

Until now, no state supreme court has held Trump ineligible for the state's ballot.

The matter is independently reported by Seattle Times (an AP feed),  and Breitbart (its own coverage). Readers can consult both, while the presumption here is the U.S. Supreme Court will review and issue an ultimate decision. 

EmptyWheel posted:

Colorado just booted Trump from the ballot, building on the lower court ruling that no only was January 6 an insurrection, but Trump is an officer thereby disqualified to be President.

I’m not going to read the opinion closely — I’m sure the whole world will do that.

This ruling’s impact will be more important for the way it will accelerate and expand the scope of the Supreme Court’s review of Trump’s January 6 conduct. The state has stayed their decision until January 4, giving Trump time — but not much — to appeal.

Therefore, to maintain the status quo pending any review by the U.S. Supreme Court, we stay our ruling until January 4, 2024 (the day before the Secretary’s deadline to certify the content of the presidential primary ballot). If review is sought in the Supreme Court before the stay expires on January 4, 2024, then the stay shall remain in place, and the Secretary will continue to be required to include President Trump’s name on the 2024 presidential primary ballot, until the receipt of any order or mandate from the Supreme Court.

There’s a non-zero possibility this will lead SCOTUS to accelerate their consideration of the Absolute Immunity appeal, which is more important in the near and long term. After all, if Trump were found guilty, then states really could and should consider the 14th Amendment implications.

One more point: Because Trump will have appealed by January 4, he will be on the primary ballot, giving SCOTUS lots of time to consider this issue before the General. But it really does put the onus on SCOTUS to decide a lot of these issues quickly.

The Colorado decision is linked at the outset of that post, and is long.

With the stay to expire in Colorado unless cert is sought before the deadline, it will be sought; while if cert is somehow denied promptly; Trump will not be on that ballot.

Other states may follow Colorado's throwing the gauntlet, and there is likely zero chance cert will be denied, i.e., the Supremes shall opine. And there is zero chance of a unanimous per curiam opinion. The Supremes will move at their own self-chosen time frame. A slow chosen speed, or expeditiously. We'll see. This is or will be a Gore v. Bush kind of exceptional case. And the individual Justices can go all over the map on the question.

Coincidentally, Breitbart reports, "Vivek Ramaswamy on Colorado Ruling: I Will Withdraw from State Primary if Trump Not Allowed on Ballot," (should anyone care). Talk about a MAGA suck-up, talk about Vivek. 

Locally, Gary Gross - who as a long-standing Republican supporting DeSantis - has opined:

Vivek Ramaswamy is either on his last legs or he's angling for a position in Donald Trump's cabinet. In either case, this is a major move to get on Trump's good side. This isn't done for altruistic motives. After the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that Trump isn't eligible to be on Colorado's GOP Primary ballot, "Presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy pledged on Tuesday to remove himself from Colorado’s Republican primary ballot in response to the state’s Supreme Court’s ruling that former President Donald Trump is ineligible to run in the state over his activity surrounding Jan. 6."

I would've forgotten that he was still in the competition if not for all of his obnoxious jabs at Nikki Haley. And no, I'm not a fan of Haley's.

This ruling is spilling lots of ink across the internet and X, formerly known as Twitter. The majority of X opinions are that SCOTUS will a) accept this case on an expedited basis and b) rule against the Colorado Supreme Court. I think that's correct. Here's what Alan Dershowitz tweeted:

Ron DeSantis added this: Jonathan Turley weighs in: [embedded FOX video segment omitted, whoever Johathan Turley is, beyond FOX talking head, a FOX POX]

As for Ramaswamy's stunt, the better way for serious GOP presidential candidates to register their opinion is for Gov. Christie and Gov. DeSantis to submit briefs to SCOTUS in support of Trump's appeal. Ramaswamy is obviously a man of great intellect and limited discipline. (Sounds familiar, doesn't it?)

With cert not yet granted, Gary presumes the obvious. And Gary clearly believes that Trump should be on the ballot in states other than the one in which he resides. On the Republican ballot nationwide seems to be his viewpoint. Meaning he views Jan. 6 as less than an insurrection, where there is strong counterargument, but I tend to agree it was less than armed, serious insurrection - an event where the QAnon Shaman got his howl, but bit nobody.

In two adjacent posts Gary showed he questions aspects of Trump's credibility and/or the Trump candidacy's validity, here and here. That leaves little more to question about Trump, perhaps his need for exercise, or his speaking style of bloviating without interruption. This from a perpetual Republican. There seems a split within the party. Tea Party MAGA acolytes vs. traditional vanilla partisan conservatives.

Posted by at