WASHINGTON (CN) — The Supreme Court expanded its highly anticipated review of Donald Trump’s disqualification from Colorado’s presidential primary ballot on Friday, granting the state time to argue why the justices should keep the former president off the ballot.
Colorado’s chief election official said she had a special interest in defending the state’s election integrity. Secretary of State Jena Griswold wants the same outcome as the voters who sued to remove Trump from the primary ballot, but she wants to present different arguments for why the justices should uphold the state court’s ruling.
The high court agreed to Griswold’s request in an order issued on Friday.
Colorado will get 10 minutes to present its arguments to the justices. The voters will have 30 minutes, and Trump will receive 40 minutes. Although scheduled for 80 minutes of argument time, the justices have a habit of running over these time constraints.
Griswold was pulled into the fight over the former president’s qualification for the ballot when a group of voters in the state sued her seeking Trump’s removal. The voters claim Trump is ineligible to hold office under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
The disqualification clause was enacted after the Civil War to prevent Confederate officers from reentering office. Section 3 mandates that any officeholder who violates their oath to support the Constitution by engaging in an insurrection cannot hold office again.
The Colorado Republican party and Trump intervened in the suit.
After a trial, Second Judicial District Judge Sarah Wallace found that Trump engaged in an insurrection but stopped short of using that finding to disqualify him from the ballot. The Colorado Supreme Court reversed on appeal, ruling to remove Trump from the ballot. The Supreme Court then agreed to review the ruling.
The voters focus their arguments on keeping an insurrectionist off the ballot, arguing Trump’s actions fall under Section 3. Colorado said it wants to focus on the state’s election laws.
“Given the implications this case has on Colorado’s presidential election process, as well as the constitutional protections Colorado’s citizens enjoy, the secretary provides an important perspective on Colorado’s election laws,” Shannon Wells Stevenson, Colorado’s solicitor general, wrote in the state’s motion.
Colorado said the Constitution gives states the authority to conduct presidential primary elections based on directions from the state legislature. Lawmakers have set the rules for resolving ballot-access challenges, and the state said Trump’s case is no different.
“While the facts and historical significance of this case are extraordinary, Colorado’s process for addressing Petitioner Trump’s qualifications was routine,” Stevenson wrote. “Over the decades, Colorado has repeatedly relied on this state court procedure to resolve ballot access and other election disputes presenting novel and complex issues of both fact and law, including issues of constitutional magnitude.”
The state describes Section 3 disqualification as similar to presidential age or citizenship requirements.
“Trump challenges Colorado’s constitutional prerogative to exclude ineligible candidates from its ballots,” Stevenson wrote. “But just as Colorado cannot be forced to place on its presidential primary ballot a naturalized citizen, a minor, or someone twice elected to the presidency, it also should not be forced to include a candidate found by its courts to have violated his oath to support the Constitution by engaging in insurrection.”
Colorado cites the electors clause as the source of the state legislatures’ authority to make decisions about elections. In Colorado, lawmakers are directed to deal with qualification challenges before ballots are cast.
The state said Trump, the Republican party and voters were given a fair review under Colorado’s process. If the Supreme Court overturned the state court’s ruling, Colorado said it would limit its electoral authority.
“Colorado’s courts fulfilled their designated role under Colorado’s Election Code and, subject to this court’s review on the federal constitutional questions, this court should uphold the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision that it would be a wrongful act for the secretary to certify Petitioner Trump to the ballot,” Stevenson wrote.
The Supreme Court will hear arguments in this case on Feb. 8.
Follow @KelseyReichmann
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
Additional Reads
-
GOP sues Nevada over late mail-in ballots May 3, 2024 -
