The Student Room Group

Trump ineligible to run for president in Colorado and Maine in 2024 Election

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-ineligible-run-president-jan-6-colorado-court/story?id=105785727#:~:text=Former%20President%20Donald%20Trump%20is,before%20the%20nation's%20highest%20court.

Former President Donald Trump is ineligible under the 14th Amendment to run for president in 2024 because of the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday -- a historic decision that sets up a battle before the nation's highest court.

"We conclude that ... President Trump engaged in insurrection," the justices wrote in the 4-3 ruling. "President Trump’s direct and express efforts, over several months, exhorting his supporters to march to the Capitol to prevent what he falsely characterized as an alleged fraud on the people of this country were indisputably overt and voluntary.

""Moreover," the justices wrote, "the evidence amply showed that President Trump undertook all these actions to aid and further a common unlawful purpose that he himself conceived and set in motion: prevent Congress from certifying the 2020 presidential election and stop the peaceful transfer of power."In light of this, the ruling states, "[W]e conclude that because President Trump is disqualified from holding the office of President under Section Three, it would be a wrongful act under the Election Code for the Secretary to list President Trump as a candidate on the presidential primary ballot.

"The justices stayed their ruling until Jan. 4, pending a likely appeal.Trump has denied any wrongdoing and attacked the Colorado 14th Amendment challenge -- and similar such lawsuits against him around the country -- as baseless and anti-democratic.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.



Trump is looking to appeal the decision though.
(edited 11 months ago)

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
He's able to appeal, so I really can't see this judgement being allowed to stand. The Supreme Court will not allow if it goes that far either.
How quickly the arguments turned from "the president never prompted or encouraged an insurrection" to "well, legally there's nothing to say he can't run again".
Reply 3
If it goes to the Supreme Court, he’ll win because he’s packed it with friendly activist judges.
lol i feel like the title should clarify 'in Colorado'. In practical terms this means nothing as he wouldn't win Colorado anyway, but it's making the Democrats look shady and desperate
Original post by albanyexpression
lol i feel like the title should clarify 'in Colorado'. In practical terms this means nothing as he wouldn't win Colorado anyway, but it's making the Democrats look shady and desperate

I’ll edit the title, don’t know if it really makes the democrats look shady as opposed to them simply holding Trump to account
Original post by Talkative Toad
I’ll edit the title, don’t know if it really makes the democrats look shady as opposed to them simply holding Trump to account

come on, it does. It's a pathetic attempt to block him running. I don't support trump but I think trying to block him by misusing ancient acts literally meant for use in the aftermath of a civil war is just silly and will backfire like all the other litigious attempt of some democrats.
and by the senate's own rules he was acquitted of inciting insurrection in 2021 (in the second impeachment vote). At least the democrats could get a bit more creative and stop trying to bring up a settled issue through different courts
(edited 11 months ago)
Original post by albanyexpression
come on, it does. It's a pathetic attempt to block him running. I don't support trump but I think trying to block him by misusing ancient acts literally meant for use in the aftermath of a civil war is just silly and will backfire like all the other litigious attempt of some democrats.
and by the senate's own rules he was acquitted of inciting insurrection in 2021 (in the second impeachment vote). At least the democrats could get a bit more creative and stop trying to bring up a settled issue through different courts

I’m no supporter of Trump or Biden but does seem weird to me that you can run for presidency even if you’re currently going through trial, that’s the USA for you I guess.
Original post by Talkative Toad
I’m no supporter of Trump or Biden but does seem weird to me that you can run for presidency even if you’re currently going through trial, that’s the USA for you I guess.

yeah but it would be even weirder if there was a law specifically to stop people standing for president, and the very act of charging them under that law would mean they couldn't run for president
A court full of democrat appointed judges barring trump from running plays right into his narrative.
Original post by albanyexpression
yeah but it would be even weirder if there was a law specifically to stop people standing for president, and the very act of charging them under that law would mean they couldn't run for president

I mean if said president is being accused of committing felonies then I don’t see the issue (this applies to both Trump and Biden).
Original post by Talkative Toad
I mean if said president is being accused of committing felonies then I don’t see the issue (this applies to both Trump and Biden).

cos then politicians would bring fake charges against each other to stop each other standing, like happens in singapore
Original post by albanyexpression
cos then politicians would bring fake charges against each other to stop each other standing, like happens in singapore

That’s true but maybe there’s a way to prevent this from happening, maybe I’m being too optimistic though 🤷🏾*♀️.
Reply 13
Original post by albanyexpression
yeah but it would be even weirder if there was a law specifically to stop people standing for president, and the very act of charging them under that law would mean they couldn't run for president

There are already laws that stops people from becoming president of USA.
Original post by albanyexpression
come on, it does. It's a pathetic attempt to block him running. I don't support trump but I think trying to block him by misusing ancient acts literally meant for use in the aftermath of a civil war is just silly and will backfire like all the other litigious attempt of some democrats.
and by the senate's own rules he was acquitted of inciting insurrection in 2021 (in the second impeachment vote). At least the democrats could get a bit more creative and stop trying to bring up a settled issue through different courts

I realise this user is now banned but for posterity I just want to point out the amusing absurdity in reasoning here - claiming that this is "silly" to use "ancient" laws "meant for use in the aftermath of the civil war" in the context of US politics, when the entire premise of the gun lobby in the US is based on an amendment that arose in the aftermath of the American revolution. Like these "ancient" laws are for better or worse part of the most fundamental political issues in the US.

It's just very laughable and transparent that the user only has an issue with the premise when it's not supporting far right loonies' ability to stay in power :rolleyes:

Note also said amendment also is the basis of a lot of equality of rights law in the US and is used to as a basis for rulings on things from racial segregation to the recent affirmative action strike down (ironically...).
(edited 11 months ago)
Hard to see how this survives contact with a 6-3 Supreme Court in any case. May not even be a 6-3 decision I suspect there'll be a decent chunk of people who are anti-Trump but believe the question should be resolved at the ballot box and not in the courts.
Reply 16
Original post by Gazpacho.
If it goes to the Supreme Court, he’ll win because he’s packed it with friendly activist judges.

All 7 Colorado judges were apparently appointed by Democrats so it's not like you can trust them either. It's the problem with politicised courts.
Reply 17
Original post by Talkative Toad
I’m no supporter of Trump or Biden but does seem weird to me that you can run for presidency even if you’re currently going through trial, that’s the USA for you I guess.

As somebody that's not a massive Trumpia I'd say it does look dodgy because not everybody believes that Trump is guilty of insurrection including I and if I don't then millions to the right of me probably don't.

Guilty of being an idiot, yes. But guilty of masterminding a coup, no. It's the police's job to stop protests, not his and not telling them to go home is not a crime.

It's also suspect that a Colorado Court could really be making this ruling given that the crime committed was in Washington DC.
(edited 11 months ago)
Reply 18
Original post by Talkative Toad
I’m no supporter of Trump or Biden but does seem weird to me that you can run for presidency even if you’re currently going through trial, that’s the USA for you I guess.

Most of the western world takes the principle of innocence before guilt and rightly so. It's just that outside the US you'd probably lose.
Original post by Rakas21
Most of the western world takes the principle of innocence before guilt and rightly so. It's just that outside the US you'd probably lose.

Yeah the USA doesn’t always seem to follow this principle.

Original post by Saracen's Fez
Hard to see how this survives contact with a 6-3 Supreme Court in any case. May not even be a 6-3 decision I suspect there'll be a decent chunk of people who are anti-Trump but believe the question should be resolved at the ballot box and not in the courts.


Probably true as well, if people dislike trump that much (the same way that I do) then they simply shouldn’t vote for him

Quick Reply