Following a Colorado district court ruling that found Trump engaged in insurrection but did not prevent him from being included on the Colorado ballot, Team Trump has issued a statement describing the decision as a victory. Despite this perspective, a former Justice Solicitor for the Department of Justice (DoJ) has cautioned that this ruling represents the “worst decision” Trump could encounter. The former official warned that the ex-President is likely to confront “extreme headwinds,” especially considering the imminent possibility of an appeal to the Supreme Court.
Court Finds Trump Engaged in Insurrection
Judge Wallace recently decided that in the Colorado case that was brought in an attempt to ban Trump from the primary ballot, the former President had engaged in an insurrection. The Judge stated in the ruling, “…the Court finds that Petitioners have established that Trump engaged in an insurrection on January 6, 2021, through incitement, and that the First Amendment does not protect Trump’s speech.”
Judge Did Not Disqualify Trump From the Ballot
As part of Judge Wallace’s ruling, she stated, “Part of the Court’s decision is its reluctance to embrace an interpretation which would disqualify a Presidential candidate without a clear, unmistakable indication that such is the intent of Section Three.”
Team Trump, “We Won This”
Trump’s lawyer, Scott Gessler, declared that the ruling was a win for Trump. “The Judge threw a lot of shade on President Trump, and you know, we’d rather not have that. At the end of the day, though, we won this.”
The Very Worst Decision Donald Trump Could Get
Upon the news of Team Trump declaring the ruling a victory, Neal Katyal, a former Solicitor General for the DoJ, told Jen Psaki in an interview on MSNBC, “If I were to put the headline on Friday night, as an appeals lawyer, it would be: This is the very worst decision Donald Trump could get from the trial court.”
He’s Going to Face Extreme Headwinds
Katyal explained to Psaki, “Because it’s going to go on appeal to the Colorado Supreme Court, perhaps the U.S. Supreme Court, and there, Trump is going to face extreme headwinds,” he warned.
Factual Findings Defended by Appeals Court
The former solicitor general told Psaki that “the factual findings get massive deference by the appeals court,” which he explained was “almost impossible to overturn.” Katyal further confirmed that a factual finding could not be overruled since it would be “a fresh look at the legal thing.”
Devastating Findings Against Trump
Katyal stated that the Judge had “factually made devastating findings against Trump,” which was he engaged in insurrection. He noted that the argument that the 14th Amendment applies to the President would be ruled on in an appeal.
Crew’s Claims of Insurrection Affirmed
CREW President Noah Bookbinder released a statement in response to the ruling, “The court’s decision affirms what our clients alleged in this lawsuit: that Donald Trump engaged in insurrection based on his role in January 6th.”
Whatever Court Order Is in Place
The Colorado Secretary of State Griswold conveyed she was surprised over Judge Wallace’s ruling. She told Psaki, in a separate interview, “but ultimately, she has ordered me to put him on the ballot, and I will, of course, follow whatever court order is in place by the time I certify the ballot.”
Trump Could Appeal Also
Griswold then discussed the probability of an appeal. “…you know, it’s a judicial process. There are days to appeal; petitioners could appeal, but Donald Trump could appeal also. He might not like being called an insurrectionist by this court and could very well file an appeal.”
Judge’s Decision Is “Wrong on the Law”
In another interview by MSNBC, Jill Wine-Banks, Former General Counsel of the Army, agreed with the statements made by Katyal. She stated that Judge Wallace was “wrong on the law” over the decision not to disqualify Trump from the ballot.
An Intent to Bar the President
Wine-Banks stated,“Of course, on the facts she is right, and she made a factual finding that he is an insurrectionist. And that would bar him if he were an officer. And I believe that any higher court will find that it was the intent to bar such a person from holding the office of President and that he will be barred.”
Minnesota Supreme Court Dismissed Lawsuit
The Minnesota Supreme Court recently rejected a comparable lawsuit aiming to prevent Trump from appearing on the primary ballot, citing a provision of the 14th Amendment.
Could Trump Be Barred From Ballot in General Election?
However, a Politico reporter Keely Garrity stated in a recent article on the trial, “But the justices noted on Wednesday that the decision applied only to the state’s primary, leaving open the possibility that the former President could be booted from the ballot in the general election in November.”
State Law Does Not Prohibit Ineligible Candidates
Garrity shared Chief Justice Natalie E. Hudson’s ruling, which explained that no state law prevented a major political party from including an ineligible candidate on the presidential nomination primary ballot or endorsing such a candidate with delegates for the national convention.
Attempts to Interfere With the Election
Following the public announcement of the Minnesota Judge’s decision, Trump’s campaign issued a statement reaffirming that the challenges related to the 14th Amendment were “nothing more than strategic, un-Constitutional attempts to interfere with the election.”
A Case in New Hampshire Was Also Dismissed
In a separate instance in New Hampshire, a judge recently rejected another effort to disqualify Trump from the Primary ballot.
Is the Judge a Coward?
In posts made online, some people shared confusion and anger over the decision from the Colorado Court. One user posted, “I get the sense no one wants to be the one to kick him off the ballot. The Judge basically said he’s an insurrectionist but maybe it’s unclear whether the 14th amendment applies to the office of the presidency??? If potus was exempt it would have been clearly written somewhere and it’s not.” Another stated, “SCOTUS has already defined what an “officer” means. The CO judge is a coward. I hope this decision can be appealed.”