The court case is heading to the Supreme Court. I'm seeing some outrageous rhetoric on it. Here is part of the fund-raising appeal from ACLJ.
The Colorado Supreme Court shockingly ruled that "President Trump is disqualified from holding the office of President" under the 14th Amendment. The first votes have already been cast in this presidential election, and the next primary is in just days, which is why we filed this emergency appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
If President Trump can be banned in one state, then he could be banned in every state – completely dismantling your fundamental constitutional right to vote, no matter who you vote for.
I've been arguing at the Supreme Court for more than 35 years, and THIS is the most dangerous attack on the Constitution I've ever seen. It's the gravest form of election interference and creates a constitutional crisis.
If we lose our right to vote, we lose our constitutional republic.
This somehow thinks that the Constitution's rules about who can be in office limit one's right to vote. I can vote for my cat, also, but the cat couldn't serve.
For reference, here is the relevant Constitutional text:
Section 3 Disqualification from Holding Office
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, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, 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. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
The legal questions I see are:
- Does the 14th Amendment apply only to Confederates or any insurrection?
- Is the presidency an office?
- Do states have the right to determine who is on their primary ballots?
A trial has already determined that Trump engaged in insurrection as a matter of fact. Appeals generally do not review factual determinations by a lower court.
1. The Constitution says insurrection, not
the insurrection, so this does not just apply to the Confederacy.
2. The Constitution refers to the office of the presidency several times.
3. Here the Court could legitimately leave who is on the primary ballots up to the states. However an insurrectionist on the general ballot would seem disqualified as the vote is really for electors, and an elector would be giving aid to the insurrectionist.
I'm afraid the real question before the court is the political ramifications of their ruling. Would ruling that Trump is disqualified cause political turmoil or violence? Does a Justice lean toward Democrats or Republicans? Would Trump be an autocrat who would have no use for a Supreme Court? I don't think these are proper considerations for the Court.
