This Thursday, February 8, the judges of the United States Supreme Court showed reluctance about the implications that validating the state of Colorado's decision to ban former President Donald Trump (2017-2021) from the Republican primaries could have for the November elections due to his role in the assault on the Capitol in 2021. The former president affirms that “there is no case” and that the accusations are attempts by the Democratic wing to prevent his candidacy.
The members of the Supreme Court of the United States showed this Thursday, February 8, their misgivings about endorsing the veto of the state of Colorado against former president Donald Trump (2017-2021) in the Republican primaries for the Presidency of the country.
The members of the court seem ready to rule in favor of trump in his legal fight over whether he is eligible to remain at the polls as he seeks to regain the Presidency despite his actions surrounding the January 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol by his followers.
Both the most progressive justices – such as Sonia Sotomayor or Elena Kagan – and the most conservative ones – including the president of the Supreme Court, John Roberts – showed in his interventions a disagreement with the idea that individual states interpret the constitutional eligibility of a candidate for national office.
“It will all come down to a handful of states that will decide the presidential elections” and this is “a rather discouraging consequence,” said Justice John Roberts, who predicted that a decision that favors Colorado could lead to attempts throughout the country to disqualify candidates.
This has been one of the central arguments of the hearing after which it will be determined whether Trump's expulsion from the Republican primaries in Colorado for his role in the assault on the Capitol in January 2021 is constitutional and if, therefore, Trump is disqualified from running for the White House.
The Supreme Court's decision will not be known today, But, according to several analysts, the arguments seem to indicate that the judges, with a conservative majority, might not choose to support Colorado for fear of altering the November presidential elections.
Trump is the favorite to win the Republican nomination and once again face President Joe Biden, the most likely Democratic candidate.
The assault on the Capitol “was incited by a sitting president”
In his speech, the lawyer representing the voters who questioned Trump's eligibility, Jason Murray, denied that Colorado is going to interfere at the national level since “ultimately, it is this court (the Supreme Court) that is going to decide.” and “resolve the issue for the nation.”
Not doing so, he noted, would mean betting on “chaos,” since the elections would go ahead with the possibility of Trump winning and then being disqualified from taking office.after the conclusion of the criminal proceedings he faces.
Although the question of whether there was an insurrection on January 6, 2021, was not the focus of the hearing, Murray insisted that the assault on the Capitol “was incited by a sitting president” who participated “in an insurrection,” so has been affected by Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, the focus of the debate.
An opinion not shared by Trump's lawyer, Jonathan Mitchell, who stated that An insurrection requires “an organized and concerted effort to overthrow the government through violence” and this did not occur.
“This was a riot, not an insurrection. The events were shameful, criminal, violent, all those things, but they did not qualify as an insurrection as that term is used in Section 3,” he stressed.
“Section 3”
This now famous section establishes that no “member of Congress or officer of the United States” who has sworn an oath to the Constitution and “participated in an insurrection or rebellion” may be “elected president or vice president,” among other public offices.
It was approved in 1868, after the Civil War, with the objective of preventing the southern rebels of the Confederacy who betrayed the Magna Carta from returning to power.
Mitchell also defended that the amendment cannot be applied to Trump because the text speaks of “officials” and does not mention presidents. and also maintained that excluding a presidential candidate from the electoral ballot is the exclusive function of Congress and the approval of a law is required.
The Supreme Court will have to make a decision quickly due to the tight electoral calendar, But analysts doubt there will be a ruling before Super Tuesday on March 5, when 15 states, including Colorado, will hold their primaries.
In an unprecedented ruling, the Colorado Justice determined in December that the 14th Amendment disqualifies the Republican for the “insurrection” of the assault on the Capitol, when a horde of Trumpists attacked Congress to try to stop the ratification of Democrat Joe Biden's victory.
Under the same argument, Maine electoral authorities also expelled Trump from the primaries. In addition, several activists and organizations have filed similar lawsuits in at least 11 states and are waiting for the Supreme Court to rule.
Trump's response
The former president of the United States pointed out this same February 8 that There is “no case” against him to disqualify him in the general elections next November and that it is more of a case of “electoral interference by Democrats.”
“It was not an insurrection,” Trump said, adding that there were no firearms among the protesters who entered the Capitol, an assertion that contrasts with the “dangerous and deadly weapons” that, according to the US Department of Justice. They carried at least 116 people accused of their participation in the assault.
The former president highlighted his good position in the pollsboth in the Republican party primaries and in an eventual face-to-face with the American president, Democrat Joe Biden, who aspires to re-election.
“You are leading the country by a lot and everywhere you beat the person who is leading (Biden),” added the former president from Mar-a-Lago, his residence in Palm Beach, who indicated that they want to prevent his candidacy.
“I think it's quite difficult to do, but I leave it in the hands of the Supreme Court,” he added.
Before journalists, Trump expressed his confidence in the highest US judicial bodyas well as the president of the Supreme Court, and pointed out that the arguments of his defense are “strong.”
The former president at the same time defended presidential immunity, one of the arguments of his lawyers, and stated that it is “imperative.”
“If a president does not have immunity, he really does not have the Presidency”he delved.
With EFE
#Supreme #Court #shows #reservations #vetoing #Trump #election
