by The campaign to remove former President Donald J. Trump from the ballot over his efforts to remain in power after the 2020 election has accelerated, with decisions in two states, Maine and Colorado, excluding him from primary ballots.
There are still ongoing challenges in many more states, based on an obscure clause in a constitutional amendment enacted after the Civil War that disqualifies from holding office government officials who “engaged in insurrection or rebellion.”
Over the years, the courts and Congress have done little to clarify how that standard should be applied, adding urgency to calls for the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in on the politically explosive dispute before the next election.
Here’s what you should know about the challenges.
Which states have already spoken out on the matter?
Maine’s secretary of state said Thursday that Trump did not qualify for the Republican primary there because of his role in the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. He agreed with a handful of citizens who claimed that he had incited an insurrection and was therefore barred from running for president again under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.
In a written decision, Secretary of State Shenna Bellows, a Democrat, said that while no one in her position had ever excluded a candidate from the ballot based on Section 3 of the amendment, “no presidential candidate had previously participated in an insurrection. .”
Hours later, the California Secretary of State announced that Trump would remain on the ballot in the country’s most populous state, where election officials have limited power to remove candidates.
In Colorado, the State Supreme Court decided in a 4-3 ruling on Dec. 19 that the former president should not be allowed to appear on the primary ballot there because he participated in the insurrection. The ruling did not address the general election.
The Colorado judges said that if their ruling were appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, then Trump would be allowed to remain on the ballot until the high court decided the matter. Colorado’s secretary of state has said she will follow any order in place on Jan. 5, when the state must certify ballots for the election.
On Wednesday, the Colorado Republican Party said it had asked the Supreme Court to hear an appeal of Colorado’s decision.
In Michigan and Minnesota, courts have ruled that election officials cannot stop the Republican Party from including Trump on its primary ballots. But both decisions left the door open to new challenges that would prevent him from participating in the general elections.
Where else are there challenges to getting Donald Trump on the ballot?
Lawsuits seeking to remove Trump from the ballot were filed in about 30 states, but many have been dismissed. As of Saturday, there were active lawsuits in at least 17 states.
Those states are: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Louisiana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Texas, Vermont, West Virginia and Wisconsin.
This list of states includes some cases in which a judge dismissed a lawsuit but the dismissal was appealed. In Colorado, the state’s high court decided the matter, but the U.S. Supreme Court was asked to hear an appeal. Local media have also reported that a lawsuit has been filed in an 18th state, Wyoming.
Requests have also been made directly to state election officials to remove Trump from the ballot.
What are the challenges about?
At the center of the disqualification efforts is the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which was adopted in 1868 and has a section that disqualifies former government officials who have betrayed their oaths by engaging in “insurrection or rebellion” from holding public office. The provision, Section 3, was intended to prevent Confederate officials from serving in the United States government.
The provision It specifically says that anyone who has served as an “official of the United States,” took an oath to support the Constitution, and then “engaged in an insurrection or rebellion” will not be able to hold any government office. It includes a provision that Congress can lift the ban with a two-thirds vote of the House and Senate.
With legal challenges mounting, the U.S. Supreme Court is widely expected to take up the matter, and experts say the scope of the decision would determine whether challenges are handled quickly or drag on for months.
Ashraf Ahmed, a Columbia Law School professor who studies election law, said that if the Supreme Court heard the case, it could avoid delving into the most important issues, such as the definition of Section 3. Instead, he said, the justices they could largely rule. for procedural reasons.
Which states could rule on the matter next?
A decision could come soon in Oregon, where the same group that filed the lawsuit in Michigan, Free Speech for People, is seeking to have the state Supreme Court remove Trump from the primary ballot there. In that case, the secretary of state has asked the court to expedite consideration of the case because primary voting must end before March 21.
John C. Bonifaz, president of Free Speech for People, said the group planned to file new challenges in other states soon, although he declined to reveal which states.
