In Colorado, attempts to remove criminal defendant Donald Trump from the 2024 ballot have entered a new phase.
A Vital Hearing
Section Three of the 14th Amendment bans anyone who took an oath of office before engaging in insurrection — or assisting insurrectionists — from holding public office ever again. A hearing aimed at getting to the bottom of whether the events of Jan 6th meet the Constitution’s definition of “insurrection,” and whether Trump’s actions were severe enough to merit evoking the clause, has begun
Trump Summoned the Mob
Attorney Eric Olson represents several voters seeking to have Trump barred from the ballot. He began by claiming that the former president “summoned and organized the mob.” He continued: “We are here because Trump claims, after all that, that he has the right to be president again. But our Constitution, the shared charter of our nation, says he cannot do so.”
An Anti-Democratic Lawsuit
Trump’s attorney – Scott Gessler – hit back by calling the lawsuit “anti-democratic.” He said: “When it comes to [deciding] who should lead our nation, it’s the people of the United States of America who make that decision – not six voters in Colorado who’ve picked and chosen who they should file a lawsuit against.”
A Similar Suit
A similar suit is taking place in Minnesota, with arguments scheduled to be heard before the state’s Supreme Court later in the week. Regardless of the decision, appeals are inevitable and the case will likely make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The U.S. Supreme Court
The U.S. Supreme Court has never ruled on what’s known as the “insurrection clause” – Section Three of the 14th Amendment. Derek T. Muller, a Notre Dame law professor, said: “We’ve had hearings with presidential candidates debating their eligibility before – Barack Obama, Ted Cruz, John McCain.”
A Plausible Legal Path
Muller added that the aforementioned cases were different from Trump’s situation because they were aimed at finding out if the relevant individuals were “natural-born citizens.” Regardless, the professor said that the legal path to barring Trump from the ballot is plausible.
Lots of Legal Resources
Numerous cases regarding Trump and the 14th Amendment have been filed across the country – but the Colorado and Minnesota ones have garnered more attention because they were filed by groups with access to a plethora of legal resources.
Trump Disqualified Himself
The Colorado lawsuit claims that “four years after taking an oath to ‘preserve, protect, and defend’ the Constitution, Trump tried to overthrow the results of the 2020 election, leading to a violent insurrection at the United States Capitol to stop the lawful transfer of power to his successor. By instigating this unprecedented assault on the American constitutional order, Trump violated his oath and disqualified himself under the 14th Amendment from holding public office.”
Alleged Election Interference
Trump, unsurprisingly, claims that these lawsuits are “election interference.” Mike Davis, another member of the former president’s legal team, said: “This is a legal Hail Mary by the Democrats. This case is going to fail.”
A Ridiculous Motion
In Colorado, Trump’s team filed a motion for the judge – Sarah B. Wallace – to step aside because she once donated $100 to the Colorado Turnout Project, a group dedicated to preventing “violent insurrections.” The latest hearing began with the judge denying this motion. “I will not allow this legal proceeding to turn into a circus,” she said.
The Internet’s Response
News of the latest development was shared across the internet and people flocked to comment sections to give their views. One person said: “Fingers crossed that both Colorado and Minnesota succeed in keeping the orange traitor off the ballot and that other states join in the effort.”
No Conviction Necessary
Another commenter wrote: “This is a very interesting case. It will likely end up in the Supreme Court and we’ll get a final-ish precedent moving forward on the 14th Amendment one way or another. The ‘given aid or comfort’ part is Trump’s legal jeopardy here as that has wording that implies no conviction is necessary.”
A Slippery Slope
Others were cautious: “I hate saying this but I personally think Trump needs to be convicted before being removed from ballots. If not, it could lead toward some slippery slope situations in the future that really disenfranchises voters.”
The Correct Answer
Another person said: “I think the correct answer is that the insurrection clause grants the legislature the authority to pass a clarifying law. There is no way the authors of the Constitution could come up with a satisfactory definition, let alone one that would last for hundreds of years. It also doesn’t make sense for the judicial branch to be the sole interpreters of this vague clause.”
Saved by the 14th Amendment
One person wondered whether or not most politicians have actually read the Constitution: “All those congressmen and senators walking the halls of Congress every day with their pocket copies of the U.S. Constitution… I’m wondering if any of them bother to take it out of their pockets to read it. Perhaps the U.S. will be saved by the 14th Amendment in 2024.”
A Menace and a Danger
Others were far more blunt with their words: “If we were following our own rules, [Trump] would have been barred from seeking office again on Jan 6th and been placed on trial. He is a menace and a danger to the entire planet.”
No Integrity or Values
Another commenter wrote: “It’s insane that the orange traitor can even be eligible to be the president as a criminal and a human with no integrity or values. I always thought the president should be one to exemplify American values… someone we’d aspire to be like and encourage our children to look up to. That is no longer true.”
An Anti-Democracy Wannabe Dictator
Another person said: “I really hope that these cases succeed. A precedent needs to be set. Anti-democracy, wannabe dictator insurrectionists will be punished and cannot hold public office.”
“Someone Else Is Running the Country for Him”: President Biden Accidently Reads Out Teleprompter Instructions During Speech
“Reverse Racism Doesn’t Exist, Idiot”: Biden’s Praise for Kamala Harris Raises Eyebrows
President Biden has claimed that Vice President Kamala Harris is fighting for freedom and that the Biden administration has rebuilt the economy. Understandably, his comments have left some people confused.
“Reverse Racism Doesn’t Exist, Idiot”: Biden’s Praise for Kamala Harris Raises Eyebrows
“I’d Like to See Him Pass a Polygraph”: Trump Fails at Basic Math and Rambles About Passing Meaningless Competency Test
According to NBC, Donald Trump has given a lengthy response to a question regarding age concerns. The former president and Republican presidential nominee candidate, who often says Biden is too old for his job at age 80, is 77.
“Seems Like Pure Racism”: House Approves Marjorie Taylor Greene’s Amendment to Cut the Secretary of Defense’s Pay to $1
The House has approved Marjorie Taylor Greene’s amendment to cut Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin’s salary to $1.
“In the Far Future, White People Won’t Exist”: Biden Says White People Will Soon Be a Minority in America
President Joe Biden has boldly claimed that the United States will soon become “a minority-White European country.”