Judge Deciding Whether Trump Can Appear On The Ballot

[The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons]

The case that the election in 2020 was not stolen may be the fact that Democrats are arguing that the election in 2024 should be stolen, and the first attempt at the theft is happening in Colorado. There, based on a spurious argument that the mobbing of the Capitol on January 6, 2021, was both led by Donald Trump and akin to southern secession and the launching of the Civil War, a trial has begun to keep the 45th president from the ballot. 

The New York Times reports that Sarah B. Wallace, the state district court judge presiding over the case, rejected multiple requests from Mr. Trump and from the Colorado Republican State Central Committee in recent weeks to dismiss the case without a trial.

In an opening statement on Monday, Eric Olson, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said his team would argue that January 6 was “an insurrection against the Constitution” and that Mr. Trump engaged in that insurrection.

Mr. Olson ran through the familiar account of Mr. Trump’s speech to his supporters on the morning of January 6 and the storming of the Capitol that followed. He reminded the court that Mr. Trump did not call off the mob for hours.

“We are here because Trump claims, after all that, he has the right to be president again,” he said. “But our Constitution, our shared charter of our nation, says he cannot do so.”

The entire case for blocking Trump from the ballot rather than trying to defeat him in the election revolves around a few law professors turned liberal activists who want judges to decide our elections rather than voters.

New Conservative Post reported earlier in the year that former federal judge J. Michael Luttig and leftwing professor of constitutional law at Harvard, Laurence H. Tribe, laid out the framework for how Democrats may attempt to block Donald Trump from being on the ballot in 2024, even if he wins the Republican nomination.

Based on the 14th Amendment’s prohibition of those “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against the Constitution from holding an official office again, the pair writes in The Atlantic that the two indictments related to the 2020 election brought against former President Trump should lead to his disqualification, regardless of whether or not he’s found guilty. 

Remember, these are the people who claim that they are “defending democracy.” 

Trump’s team also unsuccessfully sought for the case to be moved from state court in Colorado to federal court, but the leftwing judge presiding over the case refused. 

That move should not be surprising, however. The judge has refused a recuse herself from the case as it was revealed she gave a donation to an anti-Trump group was formed, per its own website, “shortly after Colorado Republicans refused to condemn the political extremists who stormed the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021.”

“Topics for this week’s hearing include the history and application of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, if the section is self-executing, if it applies to presidents, the meaning of “engaged” and “insurrection” as used in the section and how often and on what basis does the secretary of state exclude candidates based on constitutional deficiencies, among other items,” ABC News reported.

Trump’s lawyers have stated that Trump will not be testifying. Wallace had previously denied a motion to depose Trump, which would have allowed his testimony to be presented during the hearing.

After this week’s hearing, both parties will come back to court to deliver closing arguments on November 15. The judge has stated she will issue a ruling within the 48 hours that follow. 

[Read More: McCarthy Facing Primary Challenger]