A ruling issued on Tuesday preserves the position of the previous U.S. President, Donald Trump, on Michigan's 2024 presidential primary ballot.

The judge's decision adds another chapter to an ongoing narrative, where critics across a variety of states have challenged Trump's qualifications for holding office based on the 14th Amendment. These challengers have brought to light his involvement in the events of January 6, when the U.S. Capitol was breached.

The opposition has leveraged the 14th Amendment, contending that the ex-president's conduct during the unpleasant Capitol events was tantamount to insurrection against the United States. Their viewpoint, however, did not find favor with Judge James Redford of the Michigan Court of Claims, who dismissed these accusatory overtures.

Judge Redford emphasized his view that such a legal action, effectively removing a candidate's name from the presidential ballot, encroaches upon Congress's authority. This action, he argued, potentially overrides the distinctive mandate that authorizes Congress, through a two-thirds majority vote in each House, to lift such a disqualification from a person's eligibility for office.

Redford continued, highlighting an important caveat regarding the issue of applicability or interpretation of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment: this question falls within the political sphere and cannot, as it stands, be adjudicated by the court. The question's political nature renders it nonjusticiable at the present time.

A ruling issued on Tuesday preserves the position of the previous U.S. President, Donald Trump, on Michigan's 2024 presidential primary ballot.
The judge's decision adds another chapter to an ongoing narrative, where critics across a variety of states have challenged Trump's qualifications for holding office based on the 14th Amendment. These challengers have brought to light his involvement in the events of January 6, when the U.S. Capitol was breached.
The opposition has leveraged the 14th Amendment, contending that the ex-president's conduct during the unpleasant Capitol events was tantamount to insurrection against the United States. Their viewpoint, however, did not find favor with Judge James Redford of the Michigan Court of Claims, who dismissed these accusatory overtures.
Judge Redford emphasized his view that such a legal action, effectively removing a candidate's name from the presidential ballot, encroaches upon Congress's authority. This action, he argued, potentially overrides the distinctive mandate that authorizes Congress, through a two-thirds majority vote in each House, to lift such a disqualification from a person's eligibility for office.
Redford continued, highlighting an important caveat regarding the issue of applicability or interpretation of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment: this question falls within the political sphere and cannot, as it stands, be adjudicated by the court. The question's political nature renders it nonjusticiable at the present time.

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