On March 4th, 2024, the Supreme Court ruled that Donald Trump cannot be taken off the ballot in Colorado or any state on the state’s choice alone. There needs to be congressional concurrence. The court said since the presidency is a federal position the states have no right to interfere with the process and only Congress can do so; however, the states do have the authority to disqualify their state officers, including the governor or congressmen.
Giving one state the ability to affect the whole nation was declared unconstitutional by the court in the following quote: Because federal officers “‘owe their existence and functions to the united voice of the whole, not of a portion, of the people,’” powers over their election and qualifications must be specifically “delegated to, rather than reserved by, the States.”
The judges also stated that if the need arises, Congress would need to adopt a process for determining what candidates should or can be disqualified. The court emphasized the idea that a single state is comparable to a slice of an entire pie which represents the American voting system. When a piece is taken, or in this case restricted, the pie is uneven and unfair. Allowing states the power to drastically alter the election was determined to be unfair, and thus, Trump or any other presidential candidate cannot be disqualified by one state alone as was previously interpreted under the United States 14th Amendment.
Another reason given by the justices was the fact that in the future States could use the 14th amendment as a punishment weapon towards candidates which a state dislikes or fundamentally disagrees with. This ruling is also extra unique because the ruling was unanimous with all nine judges voting in favor of Trump. Donald Trump called the ruling “A big win for America” and Colorado officials expressed their deep disappointment in the decision saying: “We’re still glad we brought the case, because if we hadn’t brought the case, we wouldn’t have direction on where to go.”
They also felt that with the ruling, the Supreme Court had “abrogated their responsibility to our democracy” by ruling that only Congress could enforce Section 3.They went on to say that though they are disappointed by the outcome they are glad they presented the argument so that the topic will be covered in the future if it is ever bought up again.
Despite the outcome, the likelihood that addition challenges from both sides continuing is high.
