Legal experts say it is highly likely that the Supreme Court will review Trump’s eligibility for the ballot
The Supreme Court Likely to Review Decision on Trump’s Ballot Eligibility
The Supreme Court is expected to review a recent decision by the Colorado high court that would remove Donald Trump from the state’s primary election ballot. Legal experts believe that the Michigan high court’s opposing conclusion increases the likelihood of the Supreme Court’s intervention. The conflicting state Supreme Court rulings stem from lawsuits supported by left-wing groups, who argue that Trump’s involvement in the January 6th Capitol riot should disqualify him from holding future office under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
Michigan Supreme Court Rejects Attempt to Ban Trump from 2024 Ballot
In a significant departure from the Colorado ruling, the Michigan high court justices, in an unsigned five-page decision, stated that they did not find the questions presented worthy of review. This development adds pressure on the U.S. Supreme Court to consider the Colorado decision, which had already barred Trump from the primary ballot. Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz believes that a conflict between states on a constitutional issue of this magnitude almost guarantees Supreme Court review.
Trump has yet to formally petition the nine justices in Washington, D.C., but it is widely anticipated that he will do so soon. The Colorado Supreme Court’s decision is temporarily on hold until January 4th, and Colorado officials insist that the matter must be resolved by January 5th to print the presidential primary ballots.
Some legal experts argue that the Michigan decision may not significantly impact the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to intervene, as the two states have different laws and Michigan’s high court did not address the merits of the 14th Amendment challenge. However, the monumental nature of the Colorado decision may still prompt the Justices to accept the case for review.
Significance of the Case and Chief Justice Roberts’ Role
The lawsuit, initiated by the advocacy group Free Speech For People on behalf of Michigan voters, seeks to determine Trump’s eligibility for the ballot. The group contends that Trump’s actions on January 6th violated Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. The Michigan high court, dominated by Democratic appointees, allowed a lower court ruling to stand, which stated that election officials cannot challenge the eligibility of presidential primary candidates in the state.
While most states with similar lawsuits have either dismissed them or have pending cases, Colorado remains the only state to disqualify Trump. Legal experts, including George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, believe that the Supreme Court will not avoid ruling on this issue, considering its historic significance. Chief Justice John Roberts faces the challenge of navigating a time of declining trust in the high court, and he may seek a consensus among the justices to avoid a divisive outcome.
How does the conflicting rulings of the Colorado and Michigan high courts increase the likelihood of the Supreme Court taking up the case and providing clarity on the application of the 14th Amendment to election eligibility cases
Owever, experts anticipate that the Michigan Supreme Court’s rejection of the attempt to ban Trump from the 2024 ballot may encourage the Supreme Court to review and potentially reverse the Colorado high court’s decision.
The Colorado high court’s ruling was the result of multiple lawsuits filed by left-wing groups, who argued that Trump’s participation in the Capitol riot on January 6th disqualifies him from running for future office under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. Section 3 states that anyone who has engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States or provided aid or comfort to its enemies is ineligible to hold office.
The Colorado decision, which removed Trump from the state’s primary election ballot, has been met with controversy and divided opinion. Critics argue that the court’s interpretation of the 14th Amendment is overly broad and could set a dangerous precedent for future election eligibility cases. Supporters of the decision, on the other hand, believe that Trump’s actions in inciting the attack on the Capitol warrant his disqualification from running for public office.
Legal experts consider the conflicting rulings of the Colorado and Michigan high courts to be a crucial factor in the Supreme Court’s potential review. The Michigan Supreme Court’s rejection of the attempt to ban Trump from the 2024 ballot signals a differing view on the applicability of the 14th Amendment to Trump’s situation. This contrasting opinion increases the likelihood that the Supreme Court will take up the case to provide clarity and consistency in application of the law.
The Supreme Court has previously been reluctant to intervene in election eligibility cases, preferring to defer to state courts and their interpretation of state laws. However, the complexities and implications of Trump’s disqualification raise significant constitutional questions that may prompt the Supreme Court to step in and resolve the dispute.
If the Supreme Court decides to review the Colorado high court’s decision, the outcome could have far-reaching consequences for both Trump and future candidates facing similar challenges. It is unclear at this point how the Supreme Court would rule on the matter, as it would require a thorough examination of legal arguments and constitutional interpretation.
As the Supreme Court is the ultimate arbiter of constitutional questions, its review of the Colorado high court’s decision would provide clarity and guidance on the application of the 14th Amendment to election eligibility cases. The court’s ruling would not only impact the upcoming primary election in Colorado but also set a precedent for future cases involving candidates’ qualifications for public office.
In conclusion, the Supreme Court’s likely review of the decision on Trump’s ballot eligibility holds significant implications for both Trump and the interpretation of the 14th Amendment. The Michigan Supreme Court’s rejection of a similar attempt to ban Trump from the 2024 ballot adds to the pressure for the Supreme Court to review and potentially overturn the Colorado high court’s ruling. The outcome of this potential review will not only shape the 2022 primary election in Colorado but also establish a precedent for future cases involving candidates’ qualification for public office.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
