The Supreme Court hearings on Colorado's attempt to remove former President Donald Trump from the 2024 ballot were met with skepticism from the majority of justices. The case, which gained prominence due to its urgency in the middle of a contentious election year, focuses on Colorado's decision to block Trump based on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. This section states that no person who has engaged in insurrection after taking an oath to support the Constitution shall hold any office under the United States.
During the oral arguments, Justice Jackson pointed out that the office of the president is not explicitly mentioned in the relevant section of the 14th Amendment. This led to questions about why the language did not include the president and why any potential ambiguity should be construed as anti-democratic. Chief Justice John Roberts also raised concerns about the practical implications of upholding Colorado's actions, noting that other states could follow suit and remove candidates from the ballot based on partisan preferences, ultimately limiting the number of states that decide the presidential election.
Justice Kagan echoed Roberts' concerns, questioning the power of states in controlling who appears on the federal ballot and suggesting that disqualifying a former president for insurrection was a national issue. The justices are expected to vote on the matter in a private conference within the next few days, with a decision anticipated in a matter of days or weeks, rather than months.
In a separate matter, President Trump's legal team has been given until Monday to file for a stay or appeal the ruling against him regarding immunity in a federal criminal case. This case pertains to the former president's involvement in the events leading up to the January 6th Capitol riot, which resulted in his impeachment.
The Supreme Court's skeptical stance towards Colorado's attempt to exclude Trump from the 2024 ballot indicates the justices' reservations about granting states the power to control federal elections. The eventual decision on this matter will have significant implications for future election processes and the ability of states to exclude candidates. As the court's deliberations continue, both political parties and the public eagerly await the outcome.
