The precedent case for Colorado, the only case that tested this set of laws and the courts made a decision on, applies.
Read Hassan v. Colorado, 495 F. App'x 947, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database
casetext.com
The fellow in question was not qualified according to the Constitution. He was not a Natural Born Citizen. Colorado ruled he was ineligible in a similar court case. Hassan appealed and argued that his eligibility came into question later, it shouldn’t prevent him from being on the ballot.
But, as the magistrate judge's opinion makes clear and we expressly reaffirm here, a state's legitimate interest in protecting the integrity and practical functioning of the political process permits it to exclude from the ballot candidates who are constitutionally prohibited from assuming office. See generally Munro v. Socialist Workers Party, 479 U.S. 189, 193-95 (1986); Bullock v. Carter, 405 U.S. 134, 145(1972).
The judgment of the district court is affirmed. Appellant's motion for publication is denied.
Entered for the Court
Neil M. Gorsuch
Circuit Judge
So as Justice Gorsuch wrote, it is in the legitimate interest of a State to protect the integrity of the Political Process. It wasn’t decided on who could win. The Court didn’t say that Hassan couldn’t win, or that the question should be decided by the voters. The Court ruled that candidates should be excluded if they are ineligible to serve.
Michigan state laws do not permit them to remove a candidate. So if Hassan was on the ballot there, people could vote for him. But Colorado has a section of laws that allow, or even require the Secretary of State to remove ineligible candidates from the ballot. Ineligible according to the Constitution of the United States.
If or when the Supremes consider this issue from Colorado, they’re going to decide partially based upon a decision written by Gorsuch when he was an appeals court judge.
This is a minefield for Trump. Because there are three questions that must be answered in the decision from the Supreme Court. 1) Was the effort to overturn the election an Insurrection? The Colorado Courts decided that at every level. And here the Supreme Court is supposed to decide it based upon the evidence presented in the trial. The Supremes are free to decide it any way they want. But if they say yes to that first question it raises the next.
2) Was Donald Trump a part of the Insurrection? The 14th does not say people convicted of Insurrection. It merely says those who violated the oath to support the Constitution by participating in or providing aide and comfort to participants of an insurrection. If the court rules that yes Trump was involved in violation of the oath, well Trump’s ability to be President now hinges on the third question.
3) Does the Fourteenth apply to the office of the President? The office is not specifically mentioned. But the Executive Branch is mentioned, and the President is the head of the Executive Branch.
A yes answer to that third question means that Trump is ineligible to be President unless the Congress votes by a 2/3 majority to remove the disability.
Birchers, such as you, are similar to Muslims who consider a lie in defense of their beliefs a righteous deed. You are Bircher.
