The US Supreme Court overturned the decisions of Colorado, Illinois, and Maine to exclude Trump from
the ballots.
On Wednesday, February 28, the Cook County excluded Donald Trump from the state's ballots for the 2024 presidential primaries, overturning the previous decision of the Illinois State Board of Elections. The ruling by Judge Tracy Porter embraced arguments previously put forth by the Colorado Supreme Court
supporting the ineligibility of the former President. Don Tracy, chairman of the Republican Party, promptly commented, "As we've stated repeatedly, the Illinois Republican Party believes the people, not activist courts or unelected bureaucrats, should choose who represents them in the White House.
This decision to remove President Trump from the ballot without due process is an affront to democracy and limits the voting rights of Illinois citizens." Trump's lawyers quickly contested the interpretation of the
14th Amendment in relation to the events at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, arguing that the underlying facts do not meet the definition of insurrection and citing Trump's tweets calling for peace in Washington.
These latter appeals were deemed by Porter as mere attempts to mitigate the responsibilities arising from his previous, decidedly more inflammatory tweets.
The scenario just described, characterized by Trump's exclusion from the ballots in Colorado, Illinois, and Maine, was, however, overturned this Monday by the ruling of the United States Supreme Court. The judges of the Court, never so directly involved in matters concerning the presidency since the Bush v.
Gore case on the 2000 elections, identified congressional intervention as the necessary factor for appealing to a post-Civil War constitutional provision. The case was decided by a court that also includes three justices appointed during Trump's presidency, who, scrutinizing many of the controversial events of
recent years related to him, found his framing of the 2020 elections as fraudulent unfounded and denied protection of tax documents from Congress and prosecutors in New York.
Contrary to what might be assumed, the Supreme Court's decision is far from constituting an irreversible conclusion to the issue of Trump’;s legitimate eligibility. In fact, as observed by many, a ruling that requires active intervention from Congress, currently under the control of the Democratic Party majority,
could reopen the doors to the fight for ineligibility even after elections, in the event of Trump's victory. Therefore, there is a risk that the Supreme Court may find itself having to reconsider the matter, this time burdened with the responsibility of pronouncing itself in the midst of a total constitutional crisis.
(Associated Medias) – Tutti i diritti sono riservati