Former President Donald Trump asked a Michigan court to declare that the Michigan secretary of state has no right to ban him from the state ballot in the 2024 presidential race—pointing to his significant lead in GOP primary polls and considerable public support.
“Despite President Trump’s tremendous popularity, there are people who want to deny Michigan voters the opportunity to express their choice by voting for him,” Trump’s lawyers wrote in an Oct. 30 filing at the Michigan Court of Claims. “To accomplish this, they want the Secretary of State to violate her duties and exercise powers she does not have to keep President Trump’s name off of the ballot. And they want to use this Court as a vehicle to do it.”
The filing points out that President Trump is the “leading candidate” for the Republican nomination in the 2024 presidential race.
“According to recent polling, President Trump is leading nationally by an average [of] over 46 points over the next nearest candidate for the Republican nomination. ... In Michigan, a recent poll shows President Trump leading by 50 points,” it reads.
President Trump’s campaign had sent a letter to Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat, requesting her confirmation of his candidature in the 2024 elections, the filing states. However, Ms. Benson failed to respond.
“The Secretary’s failure to respond is creating uncertainty, which impacts how President Trump will allocate resources. This uncertainty is compounded by the fact that Secretary Benson is an active member of the opposing major political party and has publicly weighed in with her negative views of President Trump,” the filing reads.
The filing asks the court to declare that Ms. Benson “has no authority to refuse to place President Trump’s name on the ballot and enter an injunction stopping her from doing so.”
The Trump lawyers’ request comes as some activists in Michigan have filed a lawsuit asking a judge to order Ms. Benson to keep the former president’s name off the ballot by citing President Trump’s alleged involvement in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol breach.
In a Sept. 13 opinion piece in The Washington Post, Ms. Benson wrote that whether President Trump is eligible to run for the 2024 race is a decision to be made by the courts and not the secretary of state.
Blocking Trump in 2024
In the case against President Trump, the activists point to Section 3 of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which bars a citizen from holding office if they have engaged in “insurrection or rebellion” against the United States “or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.” Last week, a Court of Claims judge denied President Trump’s request to toss the lawsuit.In the Oct. 30 filing, President Trump’s lawyers point out that “the events of Jan. 6, 2021, were a riot.”
“They were not an ‘insurrection’ for purposes of Section Three of the 14th Amendment,” the filing reads. “They did not amount to levying war against the United States.
“Even if the events of Jan. 6, 2021, could constitute an ‘insurrection’ (they do not), President Trump did not ‘engage’ in it. ‘Engaging’ requires some level of active participation. Inaction is not sufficient.
“President Trump’s speech regarding the 2020 Election up to and including his speech on the Ellipse of the White House on Jan. 6, 2021, constitutes protected speech on a matter of public concern.”
“It wasn’t intended as a general provision empowering one party to disqualify the leading candidate of the other party in any future elections,” he said.
Mr. Dershowitz warned that if President Trump were to be disqualified from running for the 2024 election by any individual or institution linked to Democrats and the matter isn’t resolved by the Supreme Court, “there would be a constitutional crisis.”
The activists’ Michigan lawsuit isn’t the only one targeting President Trump. Similar cases have been filed in other states across the country that seek to paint the former president as the inciter of the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol breach incident.
In Colorado, a lawsuit focuses on the U.S. Constitution’s “insurrection” clause to ban Trump from the state’s ballot next year. A hearing on a similar case at the Minnesota Supreme Court is scheduled for this week.
“I was at the doors on Jan. 6, face to face with protestors, and I know firsthand there was NO INSURRECTION. This sham trial is clear election interference, and it has no basis in fact. I look forward to providing my eyewitness account of that,” he said.
