Donald Trump at a rally in Las Vegas, Nevada, January 27, 2024/Reuters
The Supreme Court of the United States today (Thursday) expressed doubt that former President Donald Trump can be disqualified from running for office again, in light of his supporters' assault on the Capitol in 2021.
The hearing took place following Trump's appeal of the Colorado Supreme Court's decision on December 19 that disqualified him from running in the state election, based on the 14th Amendment to the Constitution after it determined that he was involved in an insurgency against the administration.
Trump will almost certainly be the candidate of the Republicans this November as well.
The decision of the nine judges - six of whom are conservative - will also affect the rest of the states in the United States, while Trump is close to securing his victory in the primaries.
At the beginning of the hearing, the judges focused on two of the central arguments of the defense team: one of them is that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment cannot be enforced by the various states without legislation from Congress and that it does not apply to presidents.
The language of the amendment, which was passed at the end of the American Civil War in the 19th century, states that any "Officer of the United States" who swore to "support the Constitution of the United States" and then "was involved in an insurrection or rebellion against it or aided or abetted its enemies" will not be able to hold office public again.
Anti-Donald Trump protesters outside the US Supreme Court hearing in Washington, February 8, 2024/Reuters
Supreme Court Justice John Roberts, a conservative, asked Trump's lawyer, Jonathan Mitchell, whether the person in charge of elections in a particular state could disqualify a candidate who declared that he had taken an oath of allegiance as mentioned in that section and was involved in an insurgency.
"No, the Secretary of State cannot do that," he claimed.
"So even if a state disqualified someone who admitted to the uprising from the elections, it is an addition and change to the requirements of the constitution for the position."
According to him, "Even if the candidate is a rebel, Article 3 still allows the candidate to run for office and even win the election for the position - and then see if Congress removes this restriction after the election."
If the candidate is running for Congress, Trump's lawyer continued, then the House of Representatives or the Senate will have to decide for themselves whether to remove him, because "each house is the sole judge of the demands of its members."
In response to the questions of liberal judge Katanji Brown Jackson, Mitchell claimed that the language of the constitutional amendment is not valid for Trump, because he is not "an official of the United States."
He said that the person who meets this definition is an appointed official or other similar entity.
Trump's lawyers even argue that the courts cannot enforce this section of the constitutional amendment without legislation from Congress and that the former president was not involved in the uprising.
"The consequences of what the Colorado Supreme Court has done, some argue, will be quite severe," said conservative Justice Samuel Alito.
"The decision of the Supreme Court of Colorado can affect this question for many other states, possibly for all states."
More on the same topic:
Donald Trump
United States