On December 19, 2023 local time, the U.S. Supreme Court of Colorado ruled that according to the "insurrection clause" of Article 3 of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, former ** Donald Trump was responsible in the 2021 Capitol Hill ** and therefore ineligible to hold public office again, and ordered the state secretary of state to exclude his name from the state's Republican ** primary. The ruling has attracted widespread attention and has a significant impact on the current political situation in the United States.
To observe this political event, we must start with the unique political and electoral system of the United States. The United States has long adhered to the system of separation of powers between the federal and state, and the concept of "the central government is different from the locality, and the state is independent" is also deeply reflected in the system. From the beginning of each *** year until the middle of the year, each state will successively adopt the method of caucus or party primary election to determine the candidate nominated by the party. After that, the Democrats and Republicans will hold national conventions to formally determine their party's only candidate. Due to the independence of state powers, each state** can set election rules according to its own laws and regulations, including voter eligibility, election methods, election schedules, etc. The Colorado Supreme Court's final ruling, which completely kicked Trump out of the state's primary, is a typical manifestation of his statehood.
However, looking at the essence through the phenomenon, the Colorado Supreme Court's move may not only fail to reflect the so-called "local autonomy" and "judicial independence", but is the latest manifestation of the intensification of party competition in the United States and frequent breakthroughs to the bottom line. What's more, this verdict will "add fuel to the fire" of the 2024** party struggle in the United States.
The reason, process, and outcome of this verdict are all strongly tinged with party disputes. The Capitol Hill** incident shocked the world, and the so-called "halo of democracy" in the United States was eclipsed. Since then, the Democrats and their followers have sought to hold Trump accountable, and after repeated unsuccessful attempts, they have resorted to lawsuits in various states, hoping to strip Trump of his right to run again and thus cut off his return to the White House. At present, courts in more than 20 states are facing similar lawsuits, and they are basically in a state of wait-and-see or indecision. Many observers in the United States have pointed out that Colorado is a strongly pro-Democratic state, and the verdict is not surprising. However, even so, the verdict was only supported by four top state judges, and the other three voted against, especially the state's chief ** official who did not agree to deprive Trump of relevant rights. The depth of the partisan struggle can be seen.
The verdict has caused an uproar in the world, but it is not the end of the story, but it leaves more uncertainty. While ruling to strip Trump of his right to participate in the primary, the Colorado Supreme Court said the ruling could be extended to allow Trump time to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Trump's campaign was also the first to strongly condemn the Colorado Supreme Court's decision and said it would certainly appeal quickly. Some U.S. constitutional scholars have pointed out that if the Supreme Court ultimately upholds the Colorado Supreme Court's decision, it will create more new problems. How states interpret and view the Supreme Court's ruling, whether to copy and enforce it, ban Trump altogether, or simply say they are aware of the outcome but retain the power of the states to make their own decisions will be a constitutional dilemma that has never been experienced in American political history.
Regardless of the outcome, the verdict further widens the hatred between the two parties and their respective followers in the United States. On the one hand, the accusations against Trump have been supported by Democrats and their supporters, who have warmly welcomed the ruling and even urged other states to follow the example of the Colorado Supreme Court. On the other hand, there is the extreme anger of the Republican forces. Republican National Committee President Rhona McDaniel posted on social media that the "irresponsible ruling is election interference," while U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson said the ruling was "nothing more than an undisguised partisan attack." There are other Republican candidates** who have directly declared that they will withdraw from the Colorado election if the unfair ruling against Trump is not annulled**, and have attacked the Democrats for using political tricks to suppress the Republican Party.
All in all, the Colorado Supreme Court's decision has set a new record in the history of the United States, and it has also brought the fierce partisan struggle in the United States in recent years into a new stage of more chaos. 2024 is just around the corner, and the struggle between the two parties has just begun for the ultimate power struggle.
The author is a researcher and secretary-general of the China Institute for Overseas Security Studies
*:Beijing**Client Author: Qi Kai.