Op-Ed: Trump Colorado verdict is much more complex than it looks.

Federal prosecutors have asked the US Supreme Court to decide whether Donald Trump has immunity from prosecution on charges of conspiring to overturn the 2020 election – Copyright AFP Brendan SMIALOWSKI

The disqualification of Donald Trump from the 2024 election by Colorado isn’t yet a done deal. Trump plans to appeal to the Supreme Court, during which time the judgment isn’t final.

The bottom line here is that he was found to have engaged in an insurrection, which disqualifies him by Section 3 of the 14^th Amendment. Not everyone, particularly the partisan media, agrees that he did.

The situation is further complicated by Trump’s appointment of judges to the Supreme Court. Whose side are they on? Nobody’s quite sure. Many suspect the conservative judges are just rubber stamps. This is a particularly nasty issue.  

Section 3 of the 14^th Amendment is even more complex. If disqualified, it takes a two-thirds majority of both Houses of Congress to overturn the decision. Obviously, that’s not going to happen if the Supreme Court upholds the Colorado court’s verdict.

It should be an interesting case of constitutional law being put to the test. In hyper-polarized America, it’s just something else to scream about. Nobody expects rational behavior in this environment.

January 6, 2020, was undoubtedly one of the lowest ebbs of American democracy. It was appalling. It is a melodramatic epic of ego and illegal behavior of all kinds. Trump’s behavior was cited in the Congressional hearings in some detail.

But… “Was it an insurrection?” It seemed like it was. The people involved acted like it was, threatening elected representatives with death. It is a nitpicking point and a pretty irresponsible point to make. At what point do people storming a legislature stop being rioters and become insurrectionists?

The conviction of so many participants is a clue. There are now so many convictions, some lengthy, as evidence. Trump’s role on January 6 is also the cause of one of his many indictments. Many people said publicly at the time and afterward that they were supporting Trump.

Is the person who inspired these criminal convictions a participant, directly or indirectly, in terms of the 14^th Amendment? Reasonably, yes. The Colorado verdict stands unchallenged to that extent.

It should also be noted that the indictment of Trump regarding January 6 hasn’t yet been decided. The Supreme Court could hold that it can’t rule for that reason alone. If that indictment stands, game over. If Trump is acquitted, he can say a court decided he was innocent.

This is much trickier than it looks. If the Supreme Court rules Trump didn’t engage in an insurrection, and the indictment court finds that he did, it’s a mess.

There’s another even more abrasive issue. Other states may follow Colorado’s lead, and there are 50 of them in play in an election year.

Must every case be heard by the Supreme Court? Trump is a serial litigant on any verdict that is found against him.  He usually loses, but he drags out the process. He’ll appeal every one.

Colorado has pushed a button. Let’s see what blows up.

__________________________________________________________

Disclaimer
The opinions expressed in this Op-Ed are those of the author. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the Digital Journal or its members.