A significant contingent, including numerous attorneys general hailing from states with a Republican majority, have submitted legal documents in a case questioning the constitutional eligibility of the former President, Donald Trump, to be on Colorado's ballot in 2024.

This legal process follows an adverse ruling to a group of six voters who claimed that Trump instigated the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. The case is now queued for oral hearings in the Colorado Supreme Court this week.

Judge Sarah B. Wallace, in her ruling of November 17, expressed that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment has no bearing on the presidency. This conclusion was made despite her acknowledgment that Trump behaved in a manner that resembles 'insurrection' as delineated in said provision.

The provision prohibits any individual from re-occupying an office after having previously sworn an oath of allegiance to the Constitution. Promptly after the judgment, both factions appealed the case to the supreme judicial authority of the state.

The compainants, backed by the Washington based nonprofit, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics, have labeled Judge Wallace's verdict that the president is not constituted in the cadre of the 'officer(s) of the United States' specified in Section 3 as 'ludicrous'. Trump's attorneys have petitioned the Supreme Court to review multiple elements of the case, particularly the decision that suggests the former president was implicated in a purported rebellion.

A significant contingent, including numerous attorneys general hailing from states with a Republican majority, have submitted legal documents in a case questioning the constitutional eligibility of the former President, Donald Trump, to be on Colorado's ballot in 2024.
This legal process follows an adverse ruling to a group of six voters who claimed that Trump instigated the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. The case is now queued for oral hearings in the Colorado Supreme Court this week.
Judge Sarah B. Wallace, in her ruling of November 17, expressed that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment has no bearing on the presidency. This conclusion was made despite her acknowledgment that Trump behaved in a manner that resembles 'insurrection' as delineated in said provision.
The provision prohibits any individual from re-occupying an office after having previously sworn an oath of allegiance to the Constitution. Promptly after the judgment, both factions appealed the case to the supreme judicial authority of the state.
The compainants, backed by the Washington based nonprofit, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics, have labeled Judge Wallace's verdict that the president is not constituted in the cadre of the 'officer(s) of the United States' specified in Section 3 as 'ludicrous'. Trump's attorneys have petitioned the Supreme Court to review multiple elements of the case, particularly the decision that suggests the former president was implicated in a purported rebellion.

Subscribe to Our Show for Real News, All Day Every Day

Subscribe to Our Show for Real News, All Day Every Day

Real News Now Podcast

Real News Now Podcast is a Podcast bringing you the Real News All Day Every Day!

<a href="https://realnewsnow.com/">Real News Now</a> Podcast is a Podcast bringing you the Real News All Day Every Day!

Advertisement