A federal judge appointed by former President Barack Obama has handed another legal victory to former President Donald Trump in the face of attempts by left-leaning groups to block his potential 2024 presidential bid.
As reported by the Conservative Brief on Wednesday, December 6, 2023, the ongoing controversy centers around the argument that Trump’s alleged role in the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot qualifies as an “insurrection,” rendering him ineligible for elected office under the 14th Amendment.
Despite fervent efforts by various groups and even some GOP voters who accuse Trump of inciting the Capitol incident, none have succeeded thus far.
On Tuesday, conservative lawyer and Republican Party official Harmeet Dhillon shared the dismissal of a challenge to Trump’s candidacy in Arizona, highlighting the judge’s swift rejection of standing arguments.
U.S. District Judge Douglas L. Rayes, appointed by Obama, ruled against the plaintiff, John Anthony Castro, a lesser-known GOP presidential contender from Texas who had filed similar actions in 27 states.
Rayes found that Castro, in his pursuit, lacked genuine competition with Trump for votes or contributions, thereby not suffering a concrete competitive injury.
However, the legal battles persist, with the Colorado Supreme Court recently entertaining an appeal regarding Trump’s eligibility. A lower state court had previously declared Trump “guilty” of insurrection but didn’t bar him from the ballot.
The court’s decision rested on the interpretation of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which doesn’t explicitly name the presidency in disqualifying individuals engaged in insurrection.
Judge Sarah B. Wallace, who had earlier ruled Trump guilty, expressed reluctance to interpret Section 3 in a way that disqualifies a presidential candidate without a clear indication of intent.
She argued that the term “officers of the United States” did not encompass the President, suggesting that the drafters didn’t intend to include someone who had only taken the Presidential Oath.
If the Colorado Supreme Court rules against Trump, it could impact his appearance on both primary and general election ballots in the upcoming presidential race.
While Colorado may not be a swing state, the outcome might set a precedent for other states to take similar actions against the former president.
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics, a left-leaning organization in Washington, is representing some Republican and independent voters in Colorado who claim Trump incited the Capitol riot, despite his explicit call for a peaceful march on the day in question.
The legal saga surrounding Trump’s eligibility for the 2024 election continues to unfold, with contrasting rulings across states. In a peculiar turn, the Colorado Supreme Court deliberates on whether Trump’s alleged insurrection-related guilt should disqualify him from the presidency.
The court’s nuanced evaluation of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment adds complexity to the case, as it explores the drafters’ intent and the unique status of the President under this constitutional provision. The outcome in Colorado, albeit in a non-swing state, holds potential implications for electoral precedents and challenges against Trump in other jurisdictions.