This year's United States presidential election has begun to be played out in the courts. The former president and now Republican candidate Donald Trump has appealed to the Superior Court of Maine the decision of the Secretary of State, Shenna Bellows, to exclude him from the Republican primaries in that district. Trump's lawyers believe that Bellows' interpretation that, under the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution, she cannot run for having participated in a “rebellion or insurrection” is incorrect.
In parallel, Trump is preparing his appeal to the United States Supreme Court against the decision of the highest judicial body in Colorado to prevent him from participating in the primaries in that state also in application of the 14th amendment. In both states, the primaries are held on March 5, known as Super Tuesday, the date on which more than a third of the delegates who will designate the Republican presidential candidate are chosen.
In the Maine appeal, Trump's defense argues the reasons why it considers his exclusion illegal. The lawyers say the Secretary of State's decision was “the product of a process infected by bias and a widespread lack of due process; is arbitrary, capricious and characterized by abuse of discretion; affected by an error of law; ultra vires, and is not supported by substantial evidence in the record.”
Trump's lawyers believe that Bellows should have abstained due to his alleged bias against the former president and that he had no legal authority to make such a decision even if it were true that he had participated in an insurrection.
The letter indicates that it is not the Secretary of State who must apply the 14th amendment, but that the disqualification of a candidate would correspond to the electoral college and Congress. The third section of the 14th amendment says: “Whoever, having previously sworn to support the Constitution of the United States as a member, may not be a senator or representative in Congress, nor an elector to elect president and vice president, nor may he hold any civil or military office under the authority of the United States or any state. of Congress, as an officer of the United States or as a member of the Legislative Assembly of any state or as an executive or judicial officer thereof has taken part in any insurrection or rebellion against the United States or has given aid or facilities to the enemies of the country. He adds that this veto may be lifted by Congress through a vote of two-thirds of each Chamber. It is an amendment passed in 1868, three years after the end of the Civil War, that sought to prevent Confederate rebels from occupying positions of power.
Trump's appeal maintains that this provision is not automatically applicable and that “it leaves no role for state officials in its application.” The law, they argue, prohibits certain people from “occupying specific positions, [pero] not that they are presented to them or that they are chosen for them.” They also point out that “it does not apply to President Trump because he has never served as an 'official of the United States' and has never taken an 'oath to support the Constitution',” but rather the president's oath is to “preserve, protect and defend” the Constitution. Constitution.
Join EL PAÍS to follow all the news and read without limits.
Subscribe
They add that the amendment refers to any “official of the United States,” a term that, according to their interpretation, does not apply to the president. Curiously, the legal tables have been turned: in the New York fraud case, the former president's lawyers said that he should be moved to a federal court because Trump was a “United States official” and the prosecution successfully argued, otherwise.
On top of all that, lawyers say Trump has not taken part in any insurrection. The public speeches on which Ballows' decision was based, including the one he gave on January 6, 2021 before the assault on the Capitol, are protected by freedom of expression, the appeal states.
The Secretary of State's decision is on hold pending judicial appeals. The Superior Court must rule before January 17. Its decision will be appealable before the Supreme Court of Maine and the sentence it dictates, in turn, can be appealed before the nine justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, with a supermajority of six conservative judges, three of them appointed by Trump himself. during his presidency.
These judges will also have to resolve the appeal that Trump's lawyers plan to present this week against the ruling of the Colorado Supreme Court that excluded him from the primaries in that state. The highest court in the country has never ruled on the interpretation of section 3 of the 14th amendment and its doctrine will apply in the other states where Trump's eligibility is also at issue.
Bellows commented on the appeal in statements to the Associated Press on Tuesday: “This is part of the process. I trust my decision and the rule of law. “This is the Maine process and it is very important that, first and foremost, each and every one of us who are part of the Government respect the Constitution and the laws of the State,” he declared.
Subscribe here to newsletter from EL PAÍS América and receive all the key information on current events in the region
#Donald #Trump #appeals #exclusion #Maine #Republican #primary
