Michigan Supreme Court denies efforts to remove Trump from 2024 ballot
OAN’s Abril Elfi
11:44 AM – Wednesday, December 27, 2023
The Michigan Supreme Court Rejects Efforts to Remove Trump from 2024 Election Ballot
On Wednesday, the Michigan Supreme Court made a significant decision, rejecting efforts to remove former President Donald Trump from their state’s 2024 election ballot. This ruling comes as a blow to those who sought to remove Trump from the ballot, as the court expressed that they were not convinced that the questions raised warranted their review.
The court’s decision was based on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which states that individuals who have engaged in insurrection or rebellion after taking an oath to support and defend the Constitution are ineligible to hold office. Despite attempts to remove Trump from the ballot in other states like Arizona and Minnesota, the courts have also rejected these efforts.
In contrast to the Michigan Supreme Court’s ruling, the Colorado Supreme Court recently made a historic decision that prevented Trump from running in the state’s primary in 2024 due to constitutional issues.
“A majority of the court holds that President Trump is disqualified from holding the office of President under Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution,” the Colorado ruling said. ”Because he is disqualified, it would be a wrongful act under the Election Code for the Colorado Secretary of State to list him as a candidate on the presidential primary ballot.”
Trump himself took to his Truth Social platform to express his satisfaction with the Michigan Supreme Court’s decision, stating that it had “strongly and rightfully denied the Desperate Democrat attempt to take the leading Candidate in the 2024 Presidential Election, me, off the ballot in the Great State of Michigan.”
“This pathetic gambit to rig the Election has failed all across the Country, including in States that have historically leaned heavily toward the Democrats,” Trump wrote. “Colorado is the only State to have fallen prey to the scheme.”
Stay informed! Receive breaking news blasts directly to your inbox for free. Subscribe here. https://www.oann.com/alerts
A real-estate developer, bankrolled by Silicon-Valley, is promising a new Utopian community built on farmland in Northern California.
A real-estate developer, bankrolled by Silicon-Valley is promising a new Utopian community built on farmland in Northern California.
One America’s Chief White House Correspondent Monica Paige finds out what people are most excited about in 2024.
In a world of growing darkness and wokeness, one mom has written a new book that seems to be resonating with American’s.
December 22, 2023 – 6:05 AM PST HONG KONG (Reuters) – Chinese regulators announced on Friday a wide range of rules aimed…
One of the main bottlenecks for Tesla is the speed it can make the 4680 batteries used in the Cybertruck with its new dry-coating technology.
A group of 11 nonfiction authors have joined a lawsuit in Manhattan federal court that accuses OpenAI and Microsoft of misusing books the authors have written to train their models.
San Francisco police Sergeant David Radford contacted Tesla about data on an alleged stalker’s remote access to a vehicle.
rnrn
How did the Michigan Supreme Court respond to these arguments?
On the latest developments in the 2024 election by subscribing to our newsletter.
Legal Arguments and Response
The legal arguments put forth by those trying to remove Trump from the 2024 ballot centered around his alleged role in inciting the January 6th Capitol insurrection. They contended that his actions amounted to engaging in insurrection, thereby rendering him ineligible to hold office according to the 14th Amendment.
The Michigan Supreme Court, however, did not find these arguments persuasive. In their ruling, they expressed that they were not convinced that the questions raised warranted their review. This decision aligns with the stance taken by courts in other states, such as Arizona and Minnesota, which also rejected efforts to remove Trump from the ballot.
In contrast to these rulings, the Colorado Supreme Court made a different determination. They stated that President Trump was disqualified from holding the office of President under Section Three of the 14th Amendment. Consequently, the Colorado Secretary of State was prohibited from listing him as a candidate on the presidential primary ballot.
Trump’s Response
Former President Trump responded to the Michigan Supreme Court’s decision by expressing his satisfaction on his Truth Social platform. He characterized the ruling as the court’s denial of the “Desperate Democrat attempt to take the leading Candidate in the 2024 Presidential Election, me, off the ballot in the Great State of Michigan.” Trump also highlighted that similar attempts to remove him from the ballot had failed in other states.
However, he criticized the Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling, describing it as a “pathetic gambit to rig the Election” that had only prevailed in that state.
Implications
The Michigan Supreme Court’s decision carries significant implications for the 2024 election. It affirms Trump’s eligibility to appear on the ballot in Michigan, bolstering his chances of winning the state during the primary. This ruling is likely to energize his supporters and enhance his campaign’s momentum going forward.
Moreover, the contrasting rulings of different state courts highlight the complexity and divergence of legal interpretations regarding the application of the 14th Amendment to presidential candidates. This issue may continue to be a point of contention in future election cycles.
Conclusion
The Michigan Supreme Court’s rejection of efforts to remove Donald Trump from the 2024 election ballot is a significant development. The court’s ruling, based on their assessment that the questions raised did not warrant their review, mirrors decisions made by courts in other states.
While Trump celebrated the decision, he criticized the Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling that disqualified him from running in the state’s primary. These contrasting outcomes underline the complexity of applying the 14th Amendment to determine a candidate’s eligibility.
As the 2024 election approaches, the legal battles surrounding the eligibility of candidates will continue to shape the political landscape. It remains to be seen how these rulings will impact the overall electoral process.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
Now loading...