In Supreme Court case "Anderson v Trump" respondent Anderson et. al claims that there is a requirement in Colorado Electors code for every candidate to be qualified

Claim

Name

Types

Claim

Broader claims

In Supreme Court case "Anderson v Trump" respondent Anderson et al. claims that US Supreme Court should not review Trump’s claim that Colorado Supreme Court’s in "Anderson v Griswold" ruling somehow violated the Electors Clause

In Supreme Court case "Anderson v Trump" respondent Anderson et al. claims that including Donald Trump on the ballot would be a "wrongful act" by the Secretary of State as Donald Trump does not qualify

Opposing arguments

In Supreme Court case "Anderson v Trump" Donald Trump claims that Colorado Supreme Court tried to create a "wrongful act" by claiming that Secretary Griswold would violate Colorado electors code by certifying President Trump to the ballot as there is no requirement for every candidate to be qualified

Quotes that support the claim

Trump next argues that the Colorado Supreme Court misread Section 1-4-1203(2)(a) of the Election Code as limiting presidential primary ballot access to only “qualified” candidates. Pet. at 29–30. That provision expressly limits participation in the primary to parties that have “a qualified candidate.” COLO. REV. STAT. § 1-3-1203(2)(a). Trump’s argument that this requires that a party field only one qualified candidate before it can place countless unqualified candidates on the ballot is absurd. The Colorado Election Code does not require the Secretary of State to place 16-year-olds and foreign-born citizens on a party’s primary ballot when the party fields at least one qualified candidate. Nothing in the Colorado Election Code or common-sense mandates such a reading. See Hassan, 495 F. App’x at 948 (“[A] state’s legitimate interest in protecting the integrity and practical functioning of the political process permits it to exclude from the ballot candidates who are constitutionally prohibited from assuming office.”); Carson v. Reiner, 2016 CO 38

Referenced by

In Supreme Court case "Anderson v Trump" respondent Anderson et al. claims that including Donald Trump on the ballot would be a "wrongful act" by the Secretary of State as Donald Trump does not qualify

US Politics

Claim

In Supreme Court case "Anderson v Trump" Donald Trump claims that Colorado Supreme Court tried to create a "wrongful act" by claiming that Secretary Griswold would violate Colorado electors code by certifying President Trump to the ballot as there is no requirement for every candidate to be qualified

US Politics

Claim

Trump next argues that the Colorado Supreme Court misread Section 1-4-1203(2)(a) of the Election Code as limiting presidential primary ballot access to only “qualified” candidates. Pet. at 29–30. That provision expressly limits participation in the primary to parties that have “a qualified candidate.” COLO. REV. STAT. § 1-3-1203(2)(a). Trump’s argument that this requires that a party field only one qualified candidate before it can place countless unqualified candidates on the ballot is absurd. The Colorado Election Code does not require the Secretary of State to place 16-year-olds and foreign-born citizens on a party’s primary ballot when the party fields at least one qualified candidate. Nothing in the Colorado Election Code or common-sense mandates such a reading. See Hassan, 495 F. App’x at 948 (“[A] state’s legitimate interest in protecting the integrity and practical functioning of the political process permits it to exclude from the ballot candidates who are constitutionally prohibited from assuming office.”); Carson v. Reiner, 2016 CO 38

US Politics

Quote