Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) and the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) have filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing that the Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling to strike President Trump from the ballot over “insurrection” would “thwart the democratic process and the will of the American people in 2024 and beyond.”
The NRSC includes all incumbent Republican U.S. senators, and Mr. Daines serves as the committee’s chairman.
On Dec. 19, 2023, the Colorado Supreme Court disqualified President Trump from the ballot but stayed its ruling to remove his name pending a U.S. Supreme Court decision.
President Trump and the Colorado GOP have both since appealed the state ruling.
Colorado certifies its ballots on Jan. 5, after which President Trump would remain on the primary ballot even if the Supreme Court declined to hear the appeals.
On Jan. 3, Mr. Daines filed the amicus brief in the Colorado GOP’s appeal that asked the U.S. Supreme Court, among other things, to determine whether it’s a First Amendment violation to not allow political parties to primary their candidates of choice.
The NRSC argued that the Colorado decision to deny the party their candidate of choice was “unconstitutional” and emphasized that whether or not Section 3 of the 14th Amendment applies to presidents, “it unquestionably does not allow Colorado to exclude President Trump from the ballot” for two reasons.
Members argued that such a disqualification applies to holding office, not running for office, after which Congress could by a two-thirds vote remove any such disqualification.
“So even if the Colorado Supreme Court were correct that President Trump cannot take office on Inauguration Day, that court had no basis to hold that he cannot run for office on Election Day and also seek removal of any alleged disqualification from Congress if necessary,” the brief reads.
“States—including state courts—lack authority to ‘alter or add to’ the Constitution’s qualifications for federal offices, including especially the office of president.
Authority Over Primaries
They also argued that the Colorado Supreme Court didn’t provide sufficient reason to deprive voters and political parties of their First Amendment rights.“Its decision wholly bans voters and a political party from supporting, voting for, and potentially nominating their choice of presidential candidate in the party’s primary election,” the brief reads.
“If left uncorrected, the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision will unleash electoral chaos in the fast-approaching 2024 elections.
“It is virtually certain to lead to an untenable patchwork of state-court rulings on whether President Trump appears on the ballot, disenfranchising millions of voters in states that follow its lead.
“Even worse, it threatens to decide the outcome of the 2024 election by stripping the American people of the right to elect the president and transferring that right to state courts.”
The Colorado decision set off a wave of reactions with legislators calling for disqualifications in other states or criticizing the decision as one that deprives voters of choice.
A little more than a week after the Colorado disqualification, Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows disqualified President Trump from her state’s ballot as well, as no court proceeding was required by state law.
This makes for three venues—two courts in Colorado and in Maine—that have ruled Jan. 6, 2021, to be an “insurrection” and that President Trump engaged in insurrection without such charges having been brought in any venue outside of candidate eligibility state proceedings.
Courts across the nation remain in disagreement over whether Section 3 of the 14th Amendment is “self-executing” and should be applied by individual states.
The NRSC urged the Supreme Court to vacate the Colorado Supreme Court decision or reverse it and remand it back to state court.
