In a historic move, Maine and Colorado have banned former President Donald Trump from their ballots as the U.S. Supreme Court contemplates the states’ authority to block the ex-president’s candidacy under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
This Civil War-era provision prohibits individuals who have “engaged in insurrection” from holding public office.
Maine’s Democratic Secretary of State, Shenna Bellows, made the groundbreaking decision to remove Trump from the state’s presidential primary ballot, citing his role in the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol as a violation of Section 3.
This marks the first instance of an election official unilaterally taking action as the Supreme Court deliberates on Trump’s eligibility.
“I do not reach this conclusion lightly. Democracy is sacred… I am mindful that no Secretary of State has ever deprived a presidential candidate of ballot access based on Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment,” said Bellows. “I am also mindful, however, that no presidential candidate has ever before engaged in insurrection. The oath I swore to uphold the Constitution comes first above all, and my duty under Maine’s election laws, when presented with a Section 336 challenge, is to ensure that candidates who appear on the primary ballot are qualified for the office they seek.”
“The events of January 6, 2021 were unprecedented and tragic. They were an attack not only upon the Capitol and government officials but also an attack on the rule of law. The evidence here demonstrates that they occurred at the behest of and with the knowledge and support of, the outgoing President. The U.S. Constitution does not tolerate an assault on the foundations of our government, and Section 336 requires me to act in response,” said Bellows.
The Colorado Supreme Court had earlier ruled to exclude Trump from the ballot in their state, invoking the same constitutional provision. However, this decision has been temporarily stayed pending the U.S. Supreme Court’s final determination on the matter.
Colorado Republicans moved for expedited consideration of its petition to the Supreme Court on December 27, 2023.
The Trump campaign swiftly announced its intention to appeal Bellows’ decision in Maine, leading to a suspension of the ruling until the state courts offer their judgment.
Ultimately, the nation’s highest court is expected to have the final say on Trump’s eligibility in these states and potentially others.
A New Jersey citizen, John Bellocchio, filed a complaint arguing that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment disqualifies Trump based on his involvement in the Capitol riot but a legal defense is being mounted by Governor Phil Murphy’s administration.
As the legal drama unfolds, Trump remains a front-runner for the Republican nomination for the 2024 presidential election, according to polls.
The controversy centers around Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, a provision that has rarely been enforced since its addition to the Constitution over 160 years ago but only because government officials rarely betray the nation.
In September 2022, Couy Griffin, an Otero County Commissioner and a co-founder of “Cowboys for Trump,” was removed from office through a lawsuit filed by New Mexico residents who argued that his participation in the January 6th Capitol riot constituted an act of insurrection, disqualifying him from holding public office.
A New Mexico state court agreed with the plaintiffs, finding that Griffin’s actions at the Capitol met the legal definition of “insurrection” as outlined in the 14th Amendment.
This landmark decision may set a precedent for future applications of Section 3, including those involving Trump.
Legal scholars suspect that the U.S. Supreme Court majority could arrive at the same conclusion as two conservative law professors from the University of Pennsylvania Law Review who argued that Trump is ineligible for the presidency based on this constitutional provision, but critics question the novelty of the challenges.
The Supreme Court’s involvement is increasingly seen as necessary to clarify the limits of states’ authority in blocking candidates under the 14th Amendment, opening up a constitutional debate that may have far-reaching implications for the future of American elections.