Radical Left Lawfare To Block Trump Ballot Access Is Unacceptable
They just never stop. May we be as committed to protecting and preserving our American ideals and beliefs as the national Left is to erasing them.
As attorney and commentator, Mike Davis, has stated, “what is happening … is so much bigger than President Donald Trump. The “lawfare” (i.e., illicitly using the law and legal system as a weapon against political enemies) being committed by activist lawyers and activist judges against him are republic-ending tactics. If the radical left can just remove people from ballots, we are not going to have a country anymore.” (Mike Davis, Article III Project (A3P)).
These efforts to disqualify President Trump from 2024 state ballots in two states, Colorado and Minnesota, alleging that the Constitution bars “insurrectionists” from office, is an unprecedented legal theory and faces a steep legal challenge. The argument, in short, is that because of Trump’s alleged actions surrounding the Jan. 6, 2021 protests at the Capitol, he is an “insurrectionist” and is thereby prevented by the 14th Amendment from being elected president again.
Specifically, the courts in Colorado and Minnesota are considering the legal argument that “a little-invoked constitutional provision prevents Trump from holding office again. Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, enacted after the Civil War, disqualifies from public office those who swore to defend the Constitution and then “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against the U.S.” (Mariah Timms, Wall Street Journal, Nov. 1, 2023).
“Trump incited a violent mob to attack our capitol to stop the peaceful transfer of power under our Constitution,” anti-Trump lawyer Eric Olson told a Denver judge Monday at the start of a weeklong trial. He is representing a group of Republican and unregistered voters who want to keep Trump off the Colorado ballot.
Trump’s legal team argues that the disqualification claims, which are being filed in more states, are an antidemocratic attempt to prevent voters from deciding the next occupant of the White House.
“President Trump didn’t engage,” Trump lawyer Scott Gessler said in opening statements. “He didn’t carry a pitchfork to the Capitol grounds and lead a charge to get into a fistfight with legislators. He didn’t goad President Biden into going out back and having a fight. He gave a speech in which he asked people to peacefully and patriotically go to the Capitol to protest.”
In essence, the anti-Trump lawyers are asserting that the riot at the U.S. Capitol building on Jan. 6, 2021 is substantively indistinguishable from the Civil War that cost 620,000 lives and lasted 4 years. Trump is supposedly the equivalent of Stonewall Jackson, sending his troops to stop the Electoral College from certifying Biden’s election. Never mind that these “troops” were married couples and children, and no one was armed with anything more than a flag.
In addition, the attack dog suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome, Jack Smith, who spent 3 years and millions of dollars attempting to charge Trump with sedition and insurrection on January 6th, was unable to find evidence to even charge him with incitement, never mind leading a rebellion. This is why we simply cannot trust a lone Democrat Secretary of State or a single Democrat judge to make an independent decision based upon a charge Jack Smith could not bring, and certainly not when Trump has not been convicted of insurrection, sedition, or incitement by any court or by the U.S. Senate in the second impeachment.
[All of this is to say nothing of, in an entirely different trial, the blatantly unconstitutional gag order placed upon President Trump at the request, again, of highly partisan prosecutor Jack Smith and equally partisan U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan. As Mike Davis further observed “the gag order is so egregiously illegal that even the ACLU (which hasn’t found a conservative cause to champion in decades) spoke up.” Regardless, the judge and prosecutor Smith have continued to push to gag President Trump. Naturally, the Trump legal team is appealing. In late breaking news, the appeals court just stayed and put on hold Judge Chutkan’s gag order. Oral arguments are scheduled for November 20th.]
Every one of these highly strained, legally unprecedented attacks on Trump’s candidacy are not only an existential threat to him but, more importantly, to the American people and our democratic form of government—and the sacred and inviolable right we citizens have to choose our leaders.
This is election interference at its worst and must be stopped.