Here Are the 16 States Where Efforts to Remove Trump from the Ballot Are Underway
With their advocates buoyed by the apparent success of the Colorado-based lawsuit to deny former President Donald Trump a place on the 2024 presidential ballot, efforts to use the courts to thwart Trump’s chance at the White House are underway in almost a third of U.S. states.
The core argument against Trump — the front-runner in the GOP primary race — is that a part of the post-Civil War 14th Amendment bars those who have committed insurrection against the government from seeking federal office, specifically listing the legislative branch.
Success requires two things.
First, a judge has to rule that Trump committed an insurrection against the country, which a Colorado judge did in a ruling equating the vents of Jan. 6, 2021, with an insurrection and holding Trump culpable.
Second, the amendment has to be interpreted as saying it includes the presidency, which the Colorado Supreme Court did this week in its ruling that said the former president can’t be on the ballot.
The website Lawfare is tracking the Trump cases.
It says four states — Florida, Minnesota, New Hampshire and Rhode Island — have rejected claims seeking to bar the Republican front-runner from being on the ballot.
However, 13 others have cases pending filed by groups trying to block Trump: Alaska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, South Carolina, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming.
In two other states — Arizona and Michigan — cases were dismissed by a lower court but have been appealed, according to Lawfare.
In addition, Maine, which had been dormant after one case fell by the wayside, also has a challenge to Trump pending, according to The New York Times.
The list could grow. After the Colorado ruling was announced, California officials indicated they would try to use the 14th Amendment as a way to short-circuit Trump.
Today I sent a letter urging @DrWeber4CA to explore every legal option to remove former President Trump from CA’s 2024 presidential primary ballot.https://t.co/NA1CnCfFYC
— Eleni Kounalakis (@EleniForCA) December 20, 2023
The Times noted that the legal map could change if the Supreme Court hears an appeal of the Colorado ruling and comes down on Trump’s side. Even if the court were to simply agree to hear the appeal, all the cases that are pursuing similar claims would be on pause pending that decision.
The cases will complicate the logistics of ballot preparation. According to the Times, Colorado has to have its ballot set by Jan. 5 to get ballots printed in time for its March 5 primary. That is the date of the “Super Tuesday” presidential primaries, which include several of the states with cases pending.
Fox News contributor and legal scholar Jonathan Turley said the Colorado court’s intrusion into elections is troubling.
“It does bother me quite deeply. This is exceptionally dangerous. I mean, it is an anti-democratic opinion, and it could set us on a course that would be incredibly destabilizing for our system,” Turley said Wednesday.
“Our system is not perfect, but the one thing that it can recommend itself for is that it’s been stable. It survived crises that reduced other countries to a fine pumice. And so we have a system that is built to last,” he said.
Turley said making the courts a political arm would harm democracy.
“This is introducing a new element. This is introducing the ability of states to effectively block the leading candidate for the presidency by barring them from ballots, and it will result in a tit-for-tat. And this is something that is quite familiar in other countries,” he said.
“This is the way things are in places like Iran, where they have ballot cleansing, where you have people in government tell you who’s just not appropriate for you to vote for,” Turley said. “And we’re looking down that road.
“Quite fortunately, we have a Supreme Court that I think will make fast work of this. I think that they’re just dead wrong on the history, on the language, on the interpretation of the 14th Amendment.”
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
