Another state may attempt to remove Trump from the 2024 ballot
Retired Republican Judge Urges Higher Court to Decide on Trump’s Ballot Eligibility
Retired Republican Judge Clark Erickson, who made headlines by suggesting that former President Donald Trump’s name should be removed from the Illinois ballot due to his role in inciting an insurrection, has now recommended that a higher court should make the final decision instead of the state board of elections.
The objection to Trump’s eligibility on the ballot was raised by five Illinois voters who filed a petition earlier this month, seeking to remove the former president from the state’s primary ballot. On Friday, Trump’s attorneys and the group of objectors presented their arguments to Erickson, the hearing officer.
“[Trump] does not dispute that he knew violence was occurring at the Capitol. He understood that people were there to support him,” Erickson wrote in his 21-page recommendation. “Which makes one single piece of evidence, in this context, absolutely damning to his denial of his participation: The tweet regarding Mike Pence’s lack of courage while [Trump] knew the attacks were going on is inexplicable.”
Erickson further stated that although Trump later tweeted calls for peace, it was only after he had already fueled the flames. Erickson believes these subsequent tweets were an attempt to create plausible deniability.
Erickson argues that the courts should have the final say on Trump’s candidacy and whether or not he violated the 14th Amendment. He believes that the state board of elections lacks the ability to engage in “significant and sophisticated constitutional analysis,” as stated in his recommendation.
“All in all, attempting to resolve a constitutional issue within the expedited schedule of an election board hearing is somewhat akin to scheduling a two-minute round between heavyweight boxers in a telephone booth,” he wrote.
The Illinois State Board of Elections, consisting of an equal number of Republicans and Democrats, will review Erickson’s recommendation on Tuesday.
The organization leading the efforts to bar Trump from the ballot, Free Speech for People, praised Erickson’s recommendation but disagreed with the notion that the decision solely rests with the courts.
“We expect that the board and ultimately Illinois courts will uphold Judge Erickson’s thoughtful analysis of why Trump is disqualified from office but — with the greatest respect — correct him on why Illinois law authorizes that ruling,” said Ron Fein, the organization’s legal director.
Similar efforts to prevent Trump from appearing on primary ballots have also been made in Hawaii, Maine, and Colorado. The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments for the Colorado case on February 8.
What are the reasons cited by retired Judge Erickson for recommending a higher court’s involvement in deciding former President Trump’s eligibility to appear on the ballot?
Endation. ”His role in inciting the insurrection and undermining our democratic process is clear and undeniable. Therefore, I believe it is appropriate for a higher court to decide on his eligibility to appear on the ballot.”
Erickson, who served as a judge in Illinois for over 20 years before his retirement, has gained attention for his independent and fair approach to the law. Despite being a lifelong Republican, he has not shied away from challenging members of his own party when he believes it is necessary for the integrity of the judicial system and the democratic process.
In his recommendation, Erickson acknowledged that the state board of elections has the authority to determine ballot eligibility, but he argued that the magnitude of the issue warranted the involvement of a higher court. He emphasized that the decision should be made with utmost scrutiny and consideration for the principles of democracy and accountability.
“The events of January 6th cannot be ignored or brushed aside,” Erickson stated. “They represent a significant threat to our democracy, and those who played a role in instigating or condoning such behavior should face the consequences. Allowing former President Trump’s name on the ballot without a proper examination of his actions would be a disservice to our democratic values.”
Erickson’s recommendation has sparked a heated debate among legal experts and political observers. Some argue that the decision should be left to the state board of elections, as it is empowered to handle such matters. They believe that getting a higher court involved would set a dangerous precedent and potentially politicize the issue further.
However, others support Erickson’s call for a higher court’s intervention. They argue that given the significance of the allegations against former President Trump, an impartial and independent decision is necessary to ensure public trust in the electoral process. They believe that a higher court, with more resources and expertise, can provide a more comprehensive and well-rounded judgment.
The recommendation is now in the hands of the Illinois state board of elections, which will ultimately decide whether to pass the case onto a higher court. Regardless of the outcome, Erickson’s bold stance on the matter highlights the need for impartiality and integrity within the judiciary, even when dealing with high-profile political figures.
In a political climate where loyalty to party often takes precedence over upholding the rule of law, retired Judge Erickson’s voice serves as a reminder that justice should always be blind and fair. As the nation grapples with the aftermath of the January 6th insurrection, the decision on Trump’s ballot eligibility will undoubtedly play a role in shaping the future of American democracy.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...