Days before a civil trial against former President Donald Trump in Colorado is set to begin, Colorado District Judge Sarah Wallace rejected the former president’s legal arguments for dismissing the case.
The left-leaning Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington has sued the former president and Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold on behalf of six voters in Colorado to keep President Trump off the state’s ballot. The trial begins on Oct. 30.
On Sept. 29, President Trump filed a motion to dismiss, and on Oct. 25 Judge Wallace rejected it on the basis that the plaintiffs, the six citizens, can obtain relief through the petition.
“Motions to dismiss are disfavored, and may be granted when … the plaintiff would still not be entitled to any relief under any cognizable legal theory,” she wrote. In this case, the relief would be keeping President Trump off the ballot.
Similar lawsuits have been filed in other states, and some have already been dismissed. Several officials have said that the issue will ultimately land in the U.S. Supreme Court, including judges who declined to rule on the matter for a state.
Arguments
In the motion to dismiss, President Trump’s legal team put forth several defenses, including arguing that Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment does not apply to President Trump and the lawsuit fails to tie Mr. Trump to an “insurrection,” and that Congress has preempted states from judging presidential qualifications.
The Fourteenth Amendment was ratified after the Civil War, which conferred citizenship and equal rights to all persons born or naturalized in the United States, with the intention of protecting the rights of all former slaves. It included a section that barred those who had engaged in “insurrections of rebellions” against the nation from holding office, unless they had two-thirds approval from Congress.
Recently, the untested theory that President Trump could be barred from running for the presidency again because the events of Jan. 6, 2021, could constitute as an “insurrection” has picked up steam among some left-leaning advocacy groups, and lawsuits have been filed on behalf of citizens in several states.
Election officials on both sides of the aisle have declined to weigh in on the matter, some publicly stating that citizens should try to settle the issue in court, rather than the office of state secretaries.
Judge Wallace wrote in the new order that after reviewing the various cases both parties presented as precedent, she found no constitutional backing for the argument that the eligibility of presidential candidates is the domain of Congress rather than individual states.
She noted that Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment also doesn’t specify that Congress is the only government body that can judge the eligibility of a candidate.
“It would be strange for Congress to be the only entity that is empowered to determine the disability and then also the entity that is empowered to remove it,” she added.
She also wrote that these arguments will be taken into the final ruling after the trial, expecting additional evidence to be presented in court.
Insurrection Clause
Judge Wallace did not comment on the allegations that President Trump was involved in an insurrection, writing only that “this is an issue that will be addressed at the hearing set to begin Oct. 30, 2023.”
The legal arguments and subsequent ruling may be significant; several legal scholars have published articles this year both for and against the use of the Fourteenth Amendment to bar President Trump from reelection, and the arguments are wide ranging.
President Trump has already been charged in two separate criminal cases accusing him of interfering with the 2020 elections, and one is tied to the events of Jan. 6, 2021. However, neither of these cases allege he participated in an insurrection or rebellion.
He has already tried several times to throw out the Colorado case, but all motions have been rejected.
From The Epoch Times