Petitioner Anderson et al. appealed Colorado district court decision in case "Anderson v Griswold" not to declare Trump disqualified under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and therefore constitutionally ineligible to appear on any Colorado ballot as a candidate for federal or state office

  • Claim


Name

Petitioner Anderson et al. appealed Colorado district court decision in case "Anderson v Griswold" not to declare Trump disqualified under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and therefore constitutionally ineligible to appear on any Colorado ballot as a candidate for federal or state office

Types

Claim

Quotes that support the claim

The district court nevertheless concluded Trump was not disqualified under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment for two related reasons. First, because it does not apply to individuals—like Trump—who had taken only the presidential oath of office before engaging in insurrection and, second, because it does not prevent even oath-breaking insurrectionists from becoming President. The district court reasoned that the terms “President” and "Presidency” are not specifically mentioned in Section 3, that the President is not an “officer of the United States” as that term is used in Section 3, that the Presidency is not an “office under the United States” as that term is used in Section 3, and that the President’s oath to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution” is not an oath to “support” the Constitution as required by Section 3. Id. 299-315. Petitioners timely appeal this portion of the district court’s decision under C.R.S. § 1-1-113(3).

Supporting arguments

District Court of Colorado in case "Anderson v. Griswold" ruled not to remove Donald Trump from the ballot of Republican US Presidential election primaries on the basis of its finding that Trump was not constitutionally disqualified, because the relevant language of Section 3, in the court’s estimation, does not apply to the office of president of the United States

Topics

Causes of Supreme Court of State of Colorado case "Anderson v. Griswold"

Referenced by

Causes of Supreme Court of State of Colorado case "Anderson v. Griswold"

US Politics

Topic

District Court of Colorado in case "Anderson v. Griswold" ruled not to remove Donald Trump from the ballot of Republican US Presidential election primaries on the basis of its finding that Trump was not constitutionally disqualified, because the relevant language of Section 3, in the court’s estimation, does not apply to the office of president of the United States

US Politics

Claim

The district court nevertheless concluded Trump was not disqualified under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment for two related reasons. First, because it does not apply to individuals—like Trump—who had taken only the presidential oath of office before engaging in insurrection and, second, because it does not prevent even oath-breaking insurrectionists from becoming President. The district court reasoned that the terms “President” and "Presidency” are not specifically mentioned in Section 3, that the President is not an “officer of the United States” as that term is used in Section 3, that the Presidency is not an “office under the United States” as that term is used in Section 3, and that the President’s oath to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution” is not an oath to “support” the Constitution as required by Section 3. Id. 299-315. Petitioners timely appeal this portion of the district court’s decision under C.R.S. § 1-1-113(3).

US Politics

Quote