.png)
Donald Trump, the former president, speaks at a Durham, New Hampshire, campaign event on Saturday, December 16, 2023. The nation's highest court will likely hear arguments to determine whether the front-runner for the GOP nomination can continue in the race after ruling on Tuesday, Dec. 19, that Trump is ineligible for the White House under the U.S. Constitution's insurrection clause and removed from the state's presidential primary ballot. (Reba Saldanha, AP Photo/Files)
Invoking the U.S. Constitution's insurrection clause, the Colorado Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that former President Donald Trump was ineligible for the White House and disqualified him from the state's presidential primary ballot. This decision sets up a potential showdown in the nation's highest court to determine whether the front-runner for the GOP nomination can continue competing.
It is the first time in history that a presidential contender has been disqualified under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment thanks to the ruling of a court whose judges were all chosen by Democratic governors
In its 4-3 ruling, the court stated that "a majority of the court holds that Trump is disqualified from holding the office of president under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment."
The highest court in Colorado reversed a district court judge's decision, finding that Trump incited an insurrection for his involvement in the Capitol attack on January 6, 2021, but holding that he could not be disqualified from the election due to the ambiguity surrounding the provision's application to the presidency
The court postponed its decision until January 4th, or until the US Supreme Court decides the case.
Most of the court stated, "We do not reach these conclusions lightly." We acknowledge the importance and gravity of the questions that are currently in front of us. We also recognize that it is our grave responsibility to uphold the law, free from fear or favor, and unaffected by the opinions of the general public regarding the choices that the law requires us to make.
Trump's legal team had pledged to promptly challenge any disqualification to the highest court in the country, which has the last say on constitutional issues. His campaign declared that it was preparing a rejoinder to the decision.
Colorado was a 13-point loss for Trump in 2020, and he won't need the state to win the presidency the following year. The risk for the former president, however, is that additional election officials and courts will decide to follow Colorado's example and bar Trump from states where he needs to win.
By January 5, which is the deadline for the state to print its presidential primary ballots, Colorado authorities believe the matter needs to be resolved.
In an attempt to disqualify Trump under Section 3, created to prevent former Confederates from entering politics after the Civil War, dozens of cases have been filed across the country. It has been in effect since the decade following the Civil War and prohibits the removal from office of anyone who took an oath to "support" the Constitution and subsequently "engaged in insurrection or rebellion" against it.
The plaintiffs have won in their first case, which is in Colorado. Following a week-long hearing in November, District Judge Sarah B. Wallace determined that Trump had, in fact, "engaged in the insurrection" when she encouraged the attack on the Capitol on January 6. However, her decision to keep him on the ballot was mostly procedural.
Wallace was persuaded by Trump's attorneys that since Section 3 refers to "officers of the United States" who swear to "support" the Constitution, the president—who isn't listed as an "officer of the United States" anywhere in the document—must not be covered by the language because his oath is to "preserve, protect, and defend" the Constitution.
Additionally, the clause states that all offices "under the United States," including senators, representatives, presidential and vice presidential electors, and others, are protected, but it omits to list of the head of state.
The highest court in the state disagreed, siding with the lawyers for six Republican and unaffiliated voters in Colorado who contended that it was absurd to think that the amendment's framers, who were afraid of former Confederates regaining power, would forbid them from holding low-level positions but not the nation's highest one.
In opening December court arguments, attorney Jason Murray stated, "You'd be saying a rebel who took up arms against the government couldn't be a county sheriff but could be the president."
