Colorado voters urge Supreme Court to limit Trump’s power to cause greater chaos.

Spread the love

A WASHINGTON – An The attorneys for the Colorado voters who are challenging his qualifications stated in a court filing on Friday that former President Donald Trump is making a political argument, not a legal one, for why the Supreme Court should allow him to be on the ballot.

It has been stated by the attorneys that Trump is “not-so-subtly” threatening that there will be “bedlam” if he is not included on the ballot.

In their primary brief, they said, “But we already saw the `bedlam’ Trump unleashed when he was on the ballot and lost,” which was written in advance of the Supreme Court taking up the matter on February 8th.

Trump urges Supreme Court to reject efforts to keep him off ballot, warning of "chaos" in new filing - CBS News

In the matter at hand is the interpretation of the insurrection clause of the Constitution, as well as the question of whether or not Trump incited an uprising when his followers stormed the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021.
This amendment was inserted “exactly to avoid giving oath-breaking insurrectionists like Trump the power to unleash such mayhem again,” according to the attorneys representing the voters in Colorado.

There were six voters who filed a lawsuit to prevent Donald Trump from being included on the ballot for the election that will take place in Colorado on March 5. Following the upholding of that ruling by a state Supreme Court that was divided, the decision was placed on hold while Trump makes his case to the Supreme Court of the United States.

In his primary file, which was submitted approximately one week ago, Trump stated that efforts to exclude voters “promise to unleash chaos and bedlam.” As well as in other parts of the country, he encouraged the court to put a halt to the activities in Colorado as quickly and decisively as possible.

Among the legal grounds that Trump has presented is the contention that the portion of the 14th Amendment that addresses insurrection does not apply to the presidency. And even if it does, according to the lawyers representing Trump, “he did not engage in anything that qualifies as ‘insurrection.'”

For the purpose of disrupting the certification of his electoral defeat, attorneys for the other side claimed that Trump solicited and incited a mob of furious individuals.

Voters aiming to ban Trump from Colorado ballot urge US Supreme Court ruling | Reuters

According to what they stated, “the most violent attack on our nation’s Capitol since the War of 1812—an attack that obstructed the peaceful transfer of presidential power for the first time in the history of the United States—meets any plausible definition of `insurrection against the Constitution.” It would be illogical to adopt a legal framework that would absolve those who are most responsible for an uprising, such as Trump in this case, of any responsibility for their actions.

Spread the love