The US Supreme Court will likely hear an appeal of the Colorado Supreme Court's shocking ruling to bar Donald Trump off Colorado's 2024 presidential ballot, which is sure to draw attention. By a vote of 4–3, the Colorado court decided that Trump had participated in rebellion and, as a result, was unable to run for reelection under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. (Learn more about the reasoning behind applying the clause to Trump.) However, the general consensus from early reporting is that the Supreme Court will probably overturn the ruling of the lower court.
High court: Adam Liptak of the New York Times tells the Daily podcast, "I think that we should first of all reject the idea that it's a predictable 6-3 ruling," alluding to the conservative-liberal divide on the court. According to him, the crucial question is whether the court should "take that question out of the voters' hands" or whether voters should make the final decision about Trump's behavior after the 2020 election. Even the liberal justices, in Liptak's opinion, won't want to do that. Likewise, according to Jessica Levinson, a law professor at Loyola, "the justices don't want it to look like they're taking this fundamental question away from the electorate," she told the Wall Street Journal.
Complex: According to Rick Hasen of Election Law Blog, the Colorado court made decisions on many "novel legal issues," which it recognized. "Trump would need to prevail on only one of these legal issues to win on any appeal, so in some ways the legal odds are with him." Some of the "novel" questions that the Journal lists are things like "What does it mean to have been 'engaged in insurrection or rebellion?'" Since Trump hasn't been found guilty of any insurrectionist crimes, can he be excluded from the classification as one? And should the determination of Trump's eligibility be with state courts?" According to the Hill, former Trump White House attorney Ty Cobb forecasts a 9-0 decision in Trump's favor.
Too much? Although Jonathan Chait has long been a critic of Trump, he argues in New York magazine that the Supreme Court ought to overturn the decision and permit Trump to run for office. The "conclusion that Trump's attempt to secure an unelected second term was 'insurrection' isn't solid enough to bear the weight of the outcome it supports." He believes that this specific effort to undermine Trump would "backfire," and as Mediaite reports, Maggie Haberman of the New York Times told CNN on Tuesday night that the Trump team saw the choice as a gift.
The impact: Although Colorado is a consistently blue state and is thus unlikely to have much of an impact on the outcomes in 2024, Aaron Blake of the Washington Post notes that the Colorado verdict is still historic. (In addition, since the decision is on hold while an appeal is filed, it is possible that Trump will automatically be selected for the GOP primary.) Blake claims that precedent has more of an influence than actuality. it's "conceivable that Colorado becoming the first state to disqualify Trump could embolden other judges and states to go down a similar road, in a way that counts."
Other states: According to Axios, there are over a dozen legal lawsuits underway nationwide concerning whether Trump should be excluded from the election on the basis of the Fourteenth Amendment, with Michigan being one of the most significant battleground states.
High court: Adam Liptak of the New York Times tells the Daily podcast, "I think that we should first of all reject the idea that it's a predictable 6-3 ruling," alluding to the conservative-liberal divide on the court. According to him, the crucial question is whether the court should "take that question out of the voters' hands" or whether voters should make the final decision about Trump's behavior after the 2020 election. Even the liberal justices, in Liptak's opinion, won't want to do that. Likewise, according to Jessica Levinson, a law professor at Loyola, "the justices don't want it to look like they're taking this fundamental question away from the electorate," she told the Wall Street Journal.
Complex: According to Rick Hasen of Election Law Blog, the Colorado court made decisions on many "novel legal issues," which it recognized. "Trump would need to prevail on only one of these legal issues to win on any appeal, so in some ways the legal odds are with him." Some of the "novel" questions that the Journal lists are things like "What does it mean to have been 'engaged in insurrection or rebellion?'" Since Trump hasn't been found guilty of any insurrectionist crimes, can he be excluded from the classification as one? And should the determination of Trump's eligibility be with state courts?" According to the Hill, former Trump White House attorney Ty Cobb forecasts a 9-0 decision in Trump's favor.
Too much? Although Jonathan Chait has long been a critic of Trump, he argues in New York magazine that the Supreme Court ought to overturn the decision and permit Trump to run for office. The "conclusion that Trump's attempt to secure an unelected second term was 'insurrection' isn't solid enough to bear the weight of the outcome it supports." He believes that this specific effort to undermine Trump would "backfire," and as Mediaite reports, Maggie Haberman of the New York Times told CNN on Tuesday night that the Trump team saw the choice as a gift.
The impact: Although Colorado is a consistently blue state and is thus unlikely to have much of an impact on the outcomes in 2024, Aaron Blake of the Washington Post notes that the Colorado verdict is still historic. (In addition, since the decision is on hold while an appeal is filed, it is possible that Trump will automatically be selected for the GOP primary.) Blake claims that precedent has more of an influence than actuality. it's "conceivable that Colorado becoming the first state to disqualify Trump could embolden other judges and states to go down a similar road, in a way that counts."
Other states: According to Axios, there are over a dozen legal lawsuits underway nationwide concerning whether Trump should be excluded from the election on the basis of the Fourteenth Amendment, with Michigan being one of the most significant battleground states.
