Trump wants Supreme Court to overturn Colorado ruling barring him from 2024 ballot

Donald Trump's lawyers have formally asked the US Supreme Court to overturn a ruling that found him constitutionally ineligible for the presidency for his actions surrounding the January 6 attack on the US Capitol.

The Colorado Supreme Court's historic ruling last month barred the former president from appearing on the state's 2024 presidential ballot, an argument at the center of more than a dozen similar cases across the U.S. challenging his eligibility under provisions of the 14th Amendment .

The question could now be in the hands of the nation's highest court, sparking a politically explosive case that could reshape the 2024 election and have far-reaching implications beyond the former president's campaign.

Colorado judges ruled that Trump is disqualified under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which bars anyone who has taken an oath to uphold the Constitution and is “engaged in rebellion or sedition” from holding public office.

“This Court should grant certiorari to review this paramount issue, summarily reverse the Colorado Supreme Court's decision, and return the right to vote for the candidate of their choice to voters,” Trump's lawyers wrote in the US Supreme Court on Wednesday.

“The question of eligibility to serve as President of the United States is properly reserved for Congress, not the state courts, to consider and decide,” they argued. “By considering the question of President Trump's eligibility and disqualifying him from the ballot, the Colorado Supreme Court defied the authority of Congress.”

Mr. Trump's lawyers also argued that the presidency is “outside the scope” of Section 3 and that the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 was not an “insurrection” and that Mr. Trump “in no way” get involved' with her. .

Last week, after hearing three different appeals for the polls, Maine's top election official reached a similar conclusion to Colorado judges, which Mr. Trump has also appealed to that state's highest court.

The events surrounding the Capitol attack, fueled by Mr. Trump's false narrative that he was robbed of the 2020 presidential election, “were an attack not only on Capitol Hill and government officials, but an attack on the rule of law.” , Maine's minister said. State Shenna Bellows wrote.

“The evidence here demonstrates that it was done at the behest and with the knowledge and support of the outgoing president,” according to her order. “The US Constitution does not tolerate an attack on the foundations of our government.”

Last week, lawyers for Colorado Republicans also pushed the Supreme Court to overturn Colorado's decision, arguing that state judges' interpretation of Section 3 would open the door for anyone to challenge the candidates' eligibility and that there is “ real danger” “the erroneous and unprecedented analysis will be borrowed and the resulting serious legal error will be repeated.”

The nonpartisan watchdog group that launched Colorado's challenge asked the Supreme Court to resolve the case on a “quick schedule” ahead of the state's March 5 election, “so that voters in Colorado and elsewhere will know whether Trump is really constitutionally ineligible when they file their cases. primary ballots”.

The US Supreme Court has never issued an opinion on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

A lawsuit filed by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington on behalf of a group of Colorado voters in September argued that Mr. Trump had “failed” the Section 3 test, making him “constitutionally ineligible to appear on any Colorado ballot as candidate for federal or state office.”

In November, in a ruling following a trial and arguments arising from the lawsuit, Colorado District Judge Sarah Wallace found that not only did Mr. Trump instigate the attack on Capitol Hill in an attempt to prevent a peaceful transfer of power after the 2020 election, but also “dealt” with it.

Trump “acted with the specific intent to incite political violence and direct it at Capitol Hill in order to disrupt election certification,” he wrote.

After an appeal to the state's highest court, the Colorado justices wrote by a 4-3 majority on December 19 that “President Trump did not merely incite the rebellion.”

“Even when the siege on the Capitol was in full swing, he continued to support it,” they continued. “These actions constituted overt, voluntary and direct participation in the rebellion.”