Samantha Soued '24
LAST EDITED: 11/20/2023
Lawsuits in Colorado, Minnesota, and Michigan have failed to stop former POTUS Donald Trump from appearing on the ballot in state primary elections. These lawsuits are backed by many Democrats and Republicans, and plaintiffs have argued that Trump cannot be on any ballot because of his involvement in the January 6th Capitol riot. Section 3 of the 14th Amendment has been used to justify this argument, which was historically used to prevent former Confederates from being part of government:
"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…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….".
The three cases have ruled in Trump’s favor, but the courts did not decide directly on the constitutionality of his campaign for presidency. Many scholars say that it is too soon to disqualify him because his involvement on January 6th has not been legally confirmed yet (the trials are ongoing). Others say that the law only applies to general elections and not party-driven primary elections. As the 2024 presidential election approaches, new and modified lawsuits challenging Trump’s qualifications for presidency will continue to be presented to the courts.
After the closing arguments on November 15th, Colorado plaintiff’s attorney Sean Grimsley reasoned that “Never before in the history of the United States has somebody who engaged in insurrection against the Constitution run for president after having taken an oath to protect that document. Never before in the history of the United States has a sitting president sicced a mob on the Capitol while they were counting electoral votes. Section 3 of the 14th Amendment was put in place precisely for this reason.” Not too long after, the judge presiding over the case decided that this section of the Constitution did not apply to the office of the president. She did, however, acknowledge that the defendant was involved in a condemnable insurrection against the government. The plaintiffs, including advocacy group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, plan to appeal to the Colorado Supreme Court.
In the Minnesota Supreme Court, one central question lingered: “does Trump’s role in the January 6th attack on the U.S. Capitol disqualify him from the presidency?” (AP News). The question was not answered, and instead the plaintiff group - Free Speech for People - was essentially told to come back later. On November 8th, the court ruled that political parties have the right to support and choose anyone to put on the primary ballot, even “a candidate who is [hypothetically] ineligible to hold office” (CBS News). This may not hold true in the general election, according to Judge Hudson. Petitioners (plaintiffs) declared that they are going to appeal the case.
On November 14th, in the Michigan Court of Claims, Donald Trump was saved yet again. The judge ruled that he, as part of the judicial branch, does not have the authority to interpret or enforce this “political question” (CNN News), and it is instead in Congress’s control. The plaintiffs, Free Speech for People, are the same advocacy group as the Minnesota case, and they plan on appealing this case. This group is filing simultaneous lawsuits in multiple states, and legal director Ron Fain stated “The framers understood that someone who would launch an insurrection against the United States, if they are allowed back into power, would do the same or worse.”
These three rulings have preserved Trump’s space on the Republican primary ballots. However, they have also not verified/denied the core idea of these trials: that Trump is disqualified from the presidency because of his involvement in the January 6th insurrection. As the cases get appealed and new lawsuits are filed, the American people will hopefully find some clarity amidst this unprecedented time.
Comments