Trump’s Eligibility for the Presidency: A Legal Battle Across the United States

In the aftermath of the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, a series of legal challenges have been launched against former President Donald Trump’s eligibility to hold the presidency again. These challenges are based on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which prohibits individuals who have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States from holding public office.

The first legal victory in this effort came in Colorado, where the state Supreme Court found that Trump is disqualified from holding office again due to his conduct surrounding the January 6 attack. This decision was followed by a ruling from Maine’s secretary of state, who also determined that Trump is not qualified to hold the presidency. However, the question of whether Trump can appear on the 2024 ballot remains unresolved, as the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to make a final decision on this matter.

In California, Lieutenant Governor Eleni Kounalakis asked the secretary of state to explore all legal options to remove Trump from the state’s primary ballot. In response, Secretary of State Shirley Weber stated that any decision on whether to list Trump on the primary ballot must be grounded firmly in the laws and processes in place in California and the state’s Constitution. Ultimately, Trump’s name was included on California’s primary ballot.

Colorado’s case marked the first time a presidential candidate has been deemed ineligible for the White House under Section 3. The Colorado Republican Party intervened in the case, asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision. As a result, Trump’s name will appear on Colorado’s primary ballot unless the U.S. Supreme Court declines to hear the case or upholds the state Supreme Court’s ruling.

In Michigan, the Michigan Supreme Court declined to review a state Court of Appeals decision that allowed Trump to remain on the state’s presidential primary ballot. The challenge to Trump’s candidacy in Michigan was brought by four voters on behalf of the liberal advocacy group Free Speech for People, which is behind similar cases in Oregon and Minnesota.

Minnesota’s Supreme Court dismissed a case brought by eight voters who sought to have Trump’s name kept off the primary ballot. The court found that the primary is an “internal party election to serve internal party purposes” and that there is no state statute that prohibits a major political party from placing on the presidential nomination primary ballot or sending delegates to the national convention supporting a candidate who is ineligible to hold office.

In New Hampshire, Secretary of State David Scanlan stated that there is no legal basis for excluding Trump from the primary ballot. Scanlan emphasized that any candidate who pays a $1,000 filing fee and signs a declaration of candidacy swearing that they meet age, citizenship, and residency requirements will have their name listed on ballots.

Oregon Secretary of State LaVonne Griffin-Valade also decided not to remove Trump from the ballot for the Republican presidential primary, as state law does not give her the authority to determine a candidate’s qualifications. However, she noted that her decision applies only to the primary and not the November general election.

As of now, cases in 14 states arguing Trump’s ineligibility remain pending. These states include Alaska, Arizona, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, South Carolina, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. In Arizona, a lower court decision dismissing the case has been appealed.

In summary, the legal challenges against Trump’s eligibility for the presidency have led to mixed results across various states. While some states have found Trump ineligible under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, others have allowed his name to appear on primary ballots. The ultimate decision on Trump’s eligibility for the 2024 presidential election will likely be determined by the U.S. Supreme Court.