Many of these GOP attorneys general also supported the unsuccessful Supreme Court lawsuit that Texas filed in 2020 to overturn the results in four states that Trump lost.Ī group of First Amendment experts argued that Trump’s remarks at his January 6 rally were “so threatening” that they weren’t protected by his constitutional free-speech rights, and told the Colorado Supreme Court to uphold Wallace’s decision to that effect.Last week, the US Environmental Protection Agency proposed a rule that would require water systems across the country to replace millions of lead service pipes within the next 10 years. Wallace had ruled that the challengers, a group of Colorado voters, had standing to sue. Further, they claimed Trump can’t be disqualified because “there was no insurrection on January 6.”īefore the hearing, a flurry of outside groups and lawyers tried to weigh in on the case.Ī coalition of 19 state attorneys general, all Republicans, urged the court to keep Trump on the ballot by determining that the challengers couldn’t file the suit in the first place. They argued that “this proceeding should never have gone forward” because Colorado courts aren’t authorized to adjudicate federal constitutional disputes. Trump’s attorneys asked the Colorado Supreme Court to uphold Wallace’s final decision to keep Trump on the state’s ballots, but pressed the court to overturn her other findings, which they argued contained “multiple grave jurisdictional and legal errors.” “Trump does not cite a single person at the time who argued against this common-sense conclusion, and no amount of creative nay-saying by lawyers and academics 150 years later can refute it.” “Both supporters and opponents of the Fourteenth Amendment understood that,” they said in a filing, referring to the 1860s congressional debate over the amendment. Lawyers for the challengers, who are Republican and independent Colorado voters, told the court in a filing that there is “overwhelming historical consensus” that the provision known as Section 3 of the 14th Amendment “disqualified rebels from the Presidency.” The hearing in Denver is scheduled to begin at 3 p.m. Both sides will present arguments at Wednesday’s two-hour hearing.Īll seven justices on Colorado’s high court were appointed by Democratic governors. Trump appealed many of the other findings in Wallace’s stunning 102-page ruling. The anti-Trump challengers appealed Wallace’s conclusion that the ban doesn’t apply to the presidency. The provision says officials who take an oath to support the Constitution are disqualified from office if they “engaged in insurrection.” It explicitly prohibits them from serving as senators, representatives and other offices – but it doesn’t mention the presidency. Takeaways from the blockbuster Trump ‘insurrectionist ban’ rulingĪfter a weeklong bench trial last month, Colorado District Judge Sarah Wallace ruled that Trump “engaged in an insurrection” on January 6, 2021, and “acted with the specific intent to incite political violence.”īut she concluded that the insurrectionist ban doesn’t apply to the presidency, based on the text of the post-Civil War constitutional amendment. President Donald Trump gestures to supporters from The Ellipse near the White House on January 6.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |