Trump faces dual lawsuits to keep him off the ballot in 2024

[Valletta]

Section 3 of the 14th Amendment states that anyone who swore an oath to uphold the Constitution and then "engaged in insurrection" is prohibited from holding higher office. The Civil-war era law was used to bar individuals who had held roles in the Confederacy or otherwise supported it from going to Congress after the Civil War.

The argument to bar individuals who participated in the Capitol riot on Jan. 6 from the ballot was tried recently in North Carolina. Former Rep. Madison Cawthorn of North Carolina, who participated in Trump's rally at the Ellipse that preceded the assault on the Capitol, faced a lawsuit that would have disqualified him from the primary ballot in his race last year. The lawsuit was ultimately dismissed after Cawthorn lost his primary race.

Trump faces dual lawsuits to keep him off the ballot in 2024

Separate lawsuits in Colorado and Minnesota seek to remove former President Donald Trump from the primary and general election ballot.

www.cbsnews.com

If successful don't be surprised if they broaden it, keeping anyone who is MAGA off of the ballot.

 

[Brihaha]

I don't believe Mr Trump should be allowed anywhere near our White House. That being said, America is too tribal presently to set this precedent. "Red states" will start doing it with democratic candidates they dislike or fear. Even when there's no cause. That Trump feller will have all our courts tied up with this tribal nonsense for years. Justice will have to wait for the rest of our country. Just let him get humiliated again in the next election and move on with prosecuting the guy. Enough is enough. .

Good gravy, I understand why Ivanka (and former acquaintances) detached herself from the never-ending drama that is Donald Trump. His obstinate divisiveness is exhausting.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Minnesota Supreme Court punts

“There is no state statute that prohibits a major political party from placing on the presidential nomination primary ballot, or sending delegates to the national convention supporting, a candidate who is ineligible to hold office,” Chief Justice Natalie Hudson ruled.

 

[Pommer]

Minnesota Supreme Court punts

“There is no state statute that prohibits a major political party from placing on the presidential nomination primary ballot, or sending delegates to the national convention supporting, a candidate who is ineligible to hold office,” Chief Justice Natalie Hudson ruled.

It’s not against any state law in Minnesota to try to subvert the will-of-the-voters of Minnesota?

 

[essentialsaltes]

The Colorado case is quite interesting.

Takeaways from the blockbuster Trump ‘insurrectionist ban’ ruling​

The 102-page decision was a win for Trump, but it read more like a condemnation.

Colorado District Judge Sarah Wallace concluded – based on testimony of US Capitol Police officers, lawmakers, clips from Trump’s January 6, 2021, speech and expert testimony about right-wing extremism – that Trump engaged in the January 6 insurrection.

“The Court finds that Trump’s Ellipse speech incited imminent lawless violence,” she wrote.

[However]

The provision [in the 14th Amendment] says, “no person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State,” if they took an oath to “support” the constitution and then engaged in insurrection.

But it doesn’t say anything about the presidency. And furthermore, the presidential oath doesn’t say anything about “supporting” the Constitution – it’s to “preserve, protect and defend” the Constitution.

“Whether this omission was intentional, or an oversight is not for this Court to decide,” Wallace said, noting that Trump was the first president in US history to have never served in government before ascending to the White House, meaning he never swore the oath to “support” the Constitution that lawmakers and military officers take.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Minnesota Supreme Court punts

“There is no state statute that prohibits a major political party from placing on the presidential nomination primary ballot, or sending delegates to the national convention supporting, a candidate who is ineligible to hold office,” Chief Justice Natalie Hudson ruled.

Obviously every state's laws are different, but this is interesting to put up against Minnesota saying parties can put ineligible people on the ballot.

Black Panther case could be key to booting Trump off ballot: law professor​

Derek T. Muller cited the 1968 case of former Black Panther leader Eldridge Cleaver who ran for president for the Peace and Freedom Party. California excluded Cleaver from the ballot because he was below the 35-year-old minimum age limit for the presidency

"States routinely exclude ineligible candidates. In 2008, for instance, Róger Calero, a Nicaraguan national, was the Socialist Workers Party nominee for president. In some states, Calero's name appeared on the ballot. In others, a stand-in candidate, James Harris, appeared in Calero's place in states where Calero was excluded from the ballot," he wrote in his briefing.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Minnesota Supreme Court punts

“There is no state statute that prohibits a major political party from placing on the presidential nomination primary ballot, or sending delegates to the national convention supporting, a candidate who is ineligible to hold office,” Chief Justice Natalie Hudson ruled.

Contrasting with the Colorado Supreme Court:

Part 12 of article 4 of the [Colorado] Election Code governs presidential primary
elections. See generally §§ 1-4-1201 to -1207, C.R.S. (2023).3 Section 1-4-1201, C.R.S.
(2023), explains that “it is the intent of the People of the State of Colorado that the
provisions of this part 12 conform to the requirements of federal law and national
political party rules governing presidential primary elections.”
...
The Election Code limits participation in the presidential primary to
“qualified” candidates.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Regarding the absence of the President in the list of things covered by the Amendment (but finding that it is indeed an 'office' and therefore covered)

In
fact, no specific office is listed in Section Three; instead, the Section refers to “any
office, civil or military.” U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 3. True, senators,
representatives, and presidential electors are listed, but none of these positions is
considered an “office” in the Constitution. Instead, senators and representatives
are referred to as “members” of their respective bodies.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Regarding the words used in the oath.

Article VI of the Constitution provides that “all executive and judicial
Officers . . . of the United States . . . shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to
support this Constitution.”15

And now that the presidency is an office, then ipso facto magna cum laude, the presidential oath must be an oath to support the Constitution.

 

[perplexed]

If successful don't be surprised if they broaden it, keeping anyone who is MAGA off of the ballot.

??? How???

 

[ralliann]

Section 3 of the 14th Amendment states that anyone who swore an oath to uphold the Constitution and then "engaged in insurrection" is prohibited from holding higher office. The Civil-war era law was used to bar individuals who had held roles in the Confederacy or otherwise supported it from going to Congress after the Civil War.

The argument to bar individuals who participated in the Capitol riot on Jan. 6 from the ballot was tried recently in North Carolina. Former Rep. Madison Cawthorn of North Carolina, who participated in Trump's rally at the Ellipse that preceded the assault on the Capitol, faced a lawsuit that would have disqualified him from the primary ballot in his race last year. The lawsuit was ultimately dismissed after Cawthorn lost his primary race.

Trump faces dual lawsuits to keep him off the ballot in 2024

Separate lawsuits in Colorado and Minnesota seek to remove former President Donald Trump from the primary and general election ballot.

www.cbsnews.com

If successful don't be surprised if they broaden it, keeping anyone who is MAGA off of the ballot.

I don't know but I don't think they can take him off, from what I am hearing.