Trump asked the Supreme Court to hear his case quickly, and they have agreed. Therefore, oral arguments on Thursday could reveal how the justices are considering issues.
Trump’s lawyers argue in their briefs that the Constitution’s 14th Amendment doesn’t disqualify oath-breaker insurrectionists from running for office and waiting for Congress to resolve it would cause an constitutional crisis.
Trump’s legal team says he’s not an officer of the United States
Donald Trump’s attorneys argued in their Supreme Court appeal that their client does not qualify as an officer of the United States under Section 3, as only Congress has authority to enforce it and that state court misinterpreted what was meant by that clause. They further asserted that waiting until after millions have cast ballots to decide his eligibility would cause chaos at polling booths, while state courts cannot interfere in presidential elections.
On Thursday, this case is set to come before a Supreme Court comprising three justices appointed by Trump and other GOP presidents – a conservative supermajority which could decide the case’s outcome. It marks one of many high-profile and politically charged cases that will come before our highest court this year.
An outcome in favor of the plaintiffs could pave the way for similar challenges from other states, while an outcome that sides with Trump would indicate that justices did not address its core question: whether he engaged in insurrection.
The plaintiffs say he’s an insurrectionist
Dozens of Donald Trump critics have sued to have him disqualified from running in various states, using a provision of the 14th Amendment which prohibits anyone who engages in “insurrection or rebellion” from holding office. Colorado Supreme Court considered this issue for the first time last month when upholding a district judge’s ruling that Trump incited supporters to attack Capitol on Jan 6 in order to stop Congress certifying Joe Biden’s election victory.
Lawyers representing six voters and a public interest group allege that Trump’s actions constituted an act of violent insurrection to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power, violating his oath to uphold the Constitution. According to them, their Constitution doesn’t exempt presidential powers or require additional legislation in order to apply insurrection bans to them; such an outcome would put an end to ballot disqualification efforts in Colorado and Maine, potentially prompting others to follow suit.
The court’s 6-3 conservative majority
The Supreme Court granted President Trump’s petition for review of the case and will hear arguments on Thursday. Their ruling will apply both in Colorado and other states where similar lawsuits are pending. Lawyers representing both plaintiffs and Trump will appear before them as well as Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold who serves as election official for Colorado.
Plaintiffs were represented by attorneys from Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington as well as two law firms. They contended that waiting until after millions of voters have cast ballots to decide whether a presidential candidate meets eligibility requirements risks mass disenfranchisement and creates a constitutional crisis.
Trump’s attorneys argued that the 14th Amendment provision on insurrection only applied to “officers of the United States”, not presidential candidates; furthermore, they insisted that Section 3 should only be enforced through legislatively enacted means and not state courts.
The court’s dwindling public confidence
As the justices consider the Colorado ballot case, they do so at a time when confidence in the Supreme Court has reached its lowest ever recorded levels. A recent Gallup poll found that only 49% of Americans say they trust and have confidence in our top court, down from 68% just one year earlier.
The Supreme Court granted a petition for review and has expedited this case, setting oral arguments for Thursday, Feb 8th as soon as possible. Their conservative-majority panel includes three Trump appointees on their court.
In Washington State, four Republican and two independent voters, along with watchdog Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington have filed a lawsuit alleging that Trump violates the 14th Amendment’s ban on officers who engage in insurrection – such as leading up to Jan 6 Capitol Riot – which they contend disqualifies him from running for office. Should justices rule in favor of these plaintiffs it could allow other states to remove Trump from ballots altogether.
- Friday Intraday Trading Sees Nvidia’s stock Market Cap Momentarily Cross $2 Trillion
- Trump’s January 6 Civil Cases Proceed While Criminal Case Is Halted
- Trump Delivers Speech at the Columbia Black Conservative Federation Gala
- Trump Declares Strong Support for IVF Following Alabama Supreme Court Decision
- Schumer in Ukraine Declares US Backing During House Aid Standoff