Washington, D.C. – The Supreme Court signaled on Thursday that it is unlikely to allow Colorado to remove former President Donald Trump from the Republican primary ballot. During the two-hour argument, the majority of the justices expressed deep skepticism regarding Colorado’s power to bar a presidential candidate due to actions attempting to overturn the 2020 election results. The justices raised concerns about states reaching different conclusions on candidate eligibility and suggested that only Congress could enforce the provision in question, which falls under the Constitution’s 14th Amendment.
Trump himself addressed the Supreme Court arguments in a press conference at his Mar-a-Lago resort. He called the hearing a “beautiful process” but deemed the challenge to his candidacy under the 14th Amendment as “totally illegal.” Despite pinning the blame for his legal troubles on President Biden, Trump acknowledged that the ultimate decision lies with the Supreme Court.
The plaintiffs in the case, including 91-year-old Norma Anderson, expressed confidence in their position during a post-argument press conference. Murray, one of the plaintiffs, stated that they believe the Supreme Court will apply Section 3 as written. Anderson remarked that Trump’s attempt to overturn the election was unprecedented, claiming, “This is the first one that’s tried to destroy the Constitution.”
Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold called Trump’s post-argument remarks “very disturbing.” She emphasized the significance of the events at the Capitol and warned that it would be “a grave day for our country” if the Supreme Court allows Trump to remain on the ballot.
The arguments in court revolved around whether states have the authority to determine who can be considered an insurrectionist and be barred from the ballot. Shannon Stevenson, the solicitor general of Colorado, argued on behalf of Secretary of State Griswold, asserting that Colorado has the power to ban a candidate from the ballot. Stevenson cited the 14th Amendment as the basis for the state’s authority.
However, several justices expressed concern about a potential “cascading effect” if states were given the power to reach different conclusions on candidate eligibility. They argued that such a patchwork of different candidates in different states would result in disparities, highlighting the existing disparities in candidate eligibility seen across states in every election.
In a press conference following the arguments, Trump turned his attention to another case related to his immunity from prosecution over the January 6 Capitol attack. He asserted that if a president does not have immunity, they do not have a presidency, suggesting that immunity is necessary to prevent the potential for blackmail.
The Supreme Court’s questioning during the arguments and skepticism about state authority in candidate eligibility suggest that Colorado may not be able to remove Trump from the Republican primary ballot. The court’s ultimate decision will have significant implications for the interpretation and application of the 14th Amendment provision regarding insurrection and holding office.