Data map: Former ** Trump in the United States. (*Xinhua News Agency).
On December 19, local time, the Supreme Court of Colorado ruled that because of his involvement in the Capitol Hill riot on January 6, 2021, former Trump in the United States is not eligible to participate in the 2024 election Republican primary. This ruling has brought uncertainty to the 2024 elections and added new troubles to the chaotic United States.
Invoke the "insurgents ban".
According to the New York Times and others, Colorado Supreme Court justices made the ruling by a vote of 4-3 that day. The ruling invokes the Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution (the "Insurgency Prohibition"), which prohibits a person from holding public office if he has taken an oath to "uphold the Constitution of the United States" if he "causes rebellion against the United States, or gives aid or encouragement to the enemies of the United States." According to the Associated Press, the incident marks the first time in U.S. history that Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution has been used to disqualify a candidate. According to the report, this law was introduced after the American Civil War, originally aimed at the Confederate side, and was intended to prevent those who had served for the Confederate from running for federal office after the war. This provision has rarely been applied in practice in the history of the United States.
In its ruling, the court wrote that Trump not only instigated the insurrection, but also continued to support the action when the Capitol Hill riots were in full swing, and repeatedly demanded that then-Deputy Pence not fulfill his constitutional duties and call Senators to persuade them to stop counting electoral votes. "These acts constitute open, voluntary and direct participation in the rebellion. The majority therefore found that the "insurgents ban" applied to Trump, and that he was disqualified from running for office, and that he could not be listed on the primary ballot in Colorado as a candidate for the U.S. election.
The New York Times reported that Trump has faced a series of lawsuits over his eligibility to run in the 2024** election since announcing that he would be running. Colorado was the first state to rule against it, following similar lawsuits in four other states dismissed. Notably, the Colorado Supreme Court's ruling is currently on hold pending Trump's appeal and the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling. The Colorado Election** said the issue needs to be resolved by Jan. 5, 2024, the deadline for the state to determine the list of Republican primary candidates. Trump's name will still appear on the ballot in the state's Republican primary unless the case is resolved quickly and the Supreme Court upholds the opinion of the Colorado judge before the deadline in early January, according to Deutsche Welle**.
Politicians from both sides of the political ladder were busy taking sides.
Immediately after the Colorado Supreme Court's ruling, the Trump team announced that it would appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Trump himself, for his part, posted multiple responses on December 20 through the social media platform he created, in one of which he called it "a sad day for America."
Almost immediately after the verdict, Republicans stood up with Trump. Republican Johnson, Speaker of the House of Representatives of the U.S. Congress, called the Colorado ruling "a partisan attack without much cover-up," saying that "every registered voter, regardless of political party, should not be denied the right to support a candidate who has been leading in the Republican primaries in the former and polls."Rep. Stefannick of New York, the No. 3 Republican in the House of Representatives, said in a statement that "Democrats are trying to illegally remove Trump from the ballot." A number of candidates who are vying Trump for the Republican nomination have also expressed displeasure with the ruling, with even former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, the most opposed candidate for Trump, saying that "a court should not preclude a person from running without a trial and the jury did not accept evidence that someone was actually involved in the insurrection."
The Democrats' stance is quite different. In an interview with reporters on the 20th, Biden said that "Trump did support the insurrection", but "whether the 14th Amendment applies or not, I will let the court decide." Jamie Raskin, a member of the House Oversight Committee and a Democrat of Maryland, said the ruling was "firmly rooted in law and facts" and that the original intent of the 'insurgents' was ......It is to prohibit those who break their oath and try to overthrow the constitutional order". However, more Democrats decided to remain silent on the matter, with NBC reporting that some Democrats fear that the ruling could instead be a boost to Trump's election victory in November.
The Supreme People's Court has been challenged again.
Since six of the nine current Supreme Court members are conservatives, three of whom were appointed by Trump, there is a lot of concern about how the court will rule on the case. According to the Washington Post, the U.S. Supreme Court now "faces the greatest political challenge since Bush v. Gore [2000]." CNN said the Supreme Court has been at the center of contention in several elections since 2000 and now "the Supreme Court's ruling may determine the outcome of the 2024** election, not the primary election." The British newspaper The Guardian simply said that "thanks to" Colorado, "the US Supreme Court, an already politically troubled institution with historically low approval ratings, will once again be mired in partisanship."
To add insult to injury, this case is just the latest in a number of cases involving Trump that the Supreme Court has had to deal with, each with a verdict that could have implications for the 2024 election. Wall Street said that "dragging the Supreme Court into the race** is itself a damage to democracy" and that "no matter what the court decides, especially if the justices disagree on any one issue, half of Americans will be outraged." In an interview with The New York Times, New York University law professor Richard Pildes said that "most justices would definitely want the court to keep a low profile in the 2024** election."
Rick Hasson, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, said that the Supreme Court was once again pushed to the center of the election, but this time the difference is that the general political instability in the United States makes the current situation look more dangerous. Jonathan Turley, a conservative law professor at George Washington University, said in an interview with Fox News that defining the Capitol Hill riot as an "insurrection" for the purpose of disqualifying candidates would have a serious "slippery slope effect." "This is legally wrong. "This country is a powder keg, and this court is throwing matches at it." (Wen Laodu).
Overseas network copyright works shall not be authorized **.