- The Washington Times - Wednesday, February 28, 2024

A state judge in Illinois ruled Wednesday that former President Donald Trump cannot appear on the state’s primary ballot, but she put her ruling on hold to await a Supreme Court decision in a similar case.

Judge Tracie Porter said Mr. Trump was not being truthful when he said he is qualified to serve as president, and therefore he cannot be listed on the ballot. She overturned the state’s board of elections, which had allowed Mr. Trump to appear.

The judge based the decision heavily on the controversial ruling by the Colorado Supreme Court, which kicked Mr. Trump off that state’s ballot in December. That ruling has been put on hold by the U.S. Supreme Court, and in fact voters in Colorado are voting with Mr. Trump on the GOP primary ballot right now, but Judge Porter called it “persuasive.”

The Trump campaign predicted she will be quickly overturned.

“Today, an activist Democrat judge in Illinois summarily overruled the state’s board of elections and contradicted earlier decisions from dozens of other state and federal jurisdictions,” campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung said.

Judge Porter acknowledged the case was “novel” but said she was compelled to accept Colorado’s ruling as evidence Mr. Trump is not qualified.

“Based on the comparable rationale for interpreting Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment and finding that it applies to Respondent-Candidate, as made by the Colorado Supreme Court, this Court finds the historical perspectives and interpretation of the language compelling, the analytical reasonings used as language construction tools to be sound, and recognizes that a common sense approach that the President of the United States must be included in the language given the events of the Civil War era and, therefore, determines that Section 3 applies to a candidate for office of President of the United States,” Judge Porter wrote.

The 14th Amendment’s Section 3 bars certain officials who “engaged” in “insurrection” from holding offices.

But there are myriad questions, including whether Mr. Trump’s conduct did engage in insurrection, whether states have the power to enforce the prohibition, whether it covers someone who was serving as president, whether it applied to someone seeking the presidency, and whether it can be used to block access to a ballot or just prevents someone from being sworn in.

The U.S. Supreme Court seemed skeptical of the challenge to Mr. Trump during oral argument earlier this month.

A number of courts have put off decisions about Mr. Trump until the justices rule but Judge Porter plowed ahead, citing the need for a ruling before Illinois’s March 19 primary.

• Stephen Dinan can be reached at sdinan@washingtontimes.com.

Copyright © 2024 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.

Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide