A divided Colorado Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that former President Donald Trump engaged in an insurrection with his behavior surrounding the 2020 election and removed his name from the state’s primary ballots next year, setting up a showdown at the U.S. Supreme Court.
The 4-3 decision is the first major ruling on the question to go against Mr. Trump, and his campaign vowed an immediate appeal to the high court in Washington, expressing confidence the “flawed decision” will be overturned. The state court stayed its ruling until Jan. 4 in anticipation of an appeal.
The Colorado justices acknowledged they were breaking new legal ground. But they said their reading of the U.S. Constitution does indicate Mr. Trump was part of an insurrection that saw a pro-Trump mob delay counting of the Electoral College votes on Jan. 6, 2021.
They ruled that he is disqualified from holding the presidency under Section Three of the 14th Amendment.
“We do not reach these conclusions lightly. We are mindful of the magnitude and weight of the questions now before us. We are likewise mindful of our solemn duty to apply the law, without fear or favor, and without being swayed by public reaction to the decisions that the law mandates we reach,” the majority said in an unsigned opinion.
Justice Carlos Samour Jr. wrote a withering dissent, calling the process used to deny Mr. Trump a place on the ballot a “procedural Frankenstein” that twisted the Constitution and abused the former president’s rights.
SEE ALSO: Colorado GOP says it will cancel primary if Trump can’t be on ballot
“I have been involved in the justice system for thirty-three years now, and what took place here doesn’t resemble anything I’ve seen in a courtroom,” he said of the lower court proceedings.
Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung said Mr. Trump will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court swiftly to overturn the “deeply undemocratic decision.”
“Unsurprisingly, the all-Democrat appointed Colorado Supreme Court has ruled against President Trump, supporting a Soros-funded, left-wing group’s scheme to interfere in an election on behalf of Crooked Joe Biden by removing President Trump’s name from the ballot and eliminating the rights of Colorado voters to vote for the candidate of their choice,” Mr. Cheung said.
Mr. Trump, the dominant frontrunner for the GOP nomination, did not mention the court ruling at a rally Tuesday night in Waterloo Iowa, but his campaign immediately began to fundraise off the decision, asking supporters to pony up to show their support.
“A ruling party is attempting to amass total control over America by rigging the election against its leading opponent who happens to be a political outsider committed to defending the needs and interests of hardworking Americans,” Mr. Trump said in the email plea for funds. “This is how dictatorships are born.”
A group of GOP voters and independents brought the case under a state election law governing who may appear on the ballot. They were represented by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a liberal-leaning activist group.
SEE ALSO: Christie: Voters, not the courts, should sink Trump’s White House bid
The case turned on several key questions, including whether Mr. Trump “engaged” in an “insurrection” as envisioned by the Civil War-era 14th Amendment, and whether that provision applied to a president.
In the lower court proceeding, Judge Sarah Wallace, a Democrat appointee, ruled that Mr. Trump did incite violence and an insurrection intentionally on Jan. 6 — but she said the insurrection clause of the 14th Amendment did not apply to the office of the presidency.
The state Supreme Court majority on Tuesday said she was right about the insurrection but wrong about the reach of the 14th Amendment.
The relevant section reads: “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, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.”
Mr. Trump had argued the president was an officer of the Constitution, not an officer of the U.S. The majority, delving into wording of the founding document, disagreed.
The court then had to grapple with whether the Insurrection Clause is part of determining qualifications for appearing on the ballot under Colorado law, or whether it is a disqualifying event to be enforced only by Congress.
That raised questions of who gets to decide whether Mr. Trump was involved in insurrection.
Though Mr. Trump is facing several indictments, he has not been charged or convicted of leading an insurrection during the attack on the U.S. Capitol by Trump supporters on Jan. 6, 2021.
The justices in their majority ruling said the lower court’s findings, after a truncated process, were still good enough to trigger the ban.
Dissenting justices disagreed, saying even if a former president could be barred under the law, the court proceedings were far short of what should be required for fairness.
Mr. Trump lost Colorado in 2020 to President Biden by a wide margin, 55% to 42%. Colorado’s presidential primary is scheduled for March 5, Super Tuesday.
The Colorado case is one of several working their way through state courts.
Courts in Minnesota, Rhode Island, Florida, Arizona, and Michigan have moved to keep Mr. Trump on the ballot, as has the state of New Hampshire, despite critics claiming Mr. Trump is disqualified.
Even some of Mr. Trump’s rivals for the GOP nomination disagreed with the ruling. Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said voters - not the courts - should stop Mr. Trump from serving another term as president.
“I do not believe Donald Trump should be prevented from being president by any court,” Mr. Christie said Tuesday at a town hall in New Hampshire. “I think he should be prevented from being president of the United States by the voters of this country. That is what I think.”
Mr. Christie said it would be bad for the country for Mr. Trump to be blocked from the ballot when he has not been tried in the courts for engaging in insurrection.
Republican candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, a Trump admirer, said if the decision isn’t overturned he would boycott Colorado’s primary.
Other Republican allies of Mr. Trump slammed the ruling.
House Speaker Mike Johnson, Louisiana Republican, called the decision “nothing but a thinly veiled partisan attack.”
“Regardless of political affiliation, every citizen registered to vote should not be denied the right to support our former president and the individual who is the leader in every poll of the Republican primary,” Mr. Johnson said. “We trust the U.S. Supreme Court will set aside this reckless decision and let the American people decide the next President of the United States.”
Rep. Ted Lieu, California Democrat, said the Constitution demanded this outcome.
“An an impeachment manager, it was very clear to me that the evidence showed Trump called for and incited the mob on January 6,” he wrote on X.
The unprecedented nature of the case has only deepened divisions.
Justice Samour said Colorado has particular rules governing challenges to a person’s place on a ballot, but not every state has such rules.
If the state decision stands, it would mean Mr. Trump would be denied from some ballots but not others, “risking chaos in our country.”
“This can’t possibly be the outcome the framers intended,” he wrote.
Sen. Thom Tillis, North Carolina Republican, announced Tuesday evening that he will introduce legislation to clarify that the U.S. Supreme Court gets final say in questions concerning the Insurrection Clause.
“Regardless of whether you support or oppose former President Donald Trump, it is outrageous to see left-wing activists make a mockery of our political system by scheming with partisan state officials and pressuring judges to remove him from the ballot,” he said.
• Seth McLaughlin contributed to this report.
• Alex Swoyer can be reached at aswoyer@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.