Former President Donald Trump has never been convicted of leading an insurrection.
His crime may be leading President Joe Biden in the polls for the 2024 election.
Using insurrection as a legal tool, a Democrat-led movement across the United States is trying to remove President Trump from primary ballots, and this week that movement picked up steam.
The Colorado Supreme Court on Tuesday removed President Trump from the state’s primary ballot, saying he “engaged” in an “insurrection” and was not eligible to be on the ballot. The decision is expected to be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Similar lawsuits have been tried in Arizona, Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Michigan, but each case ended with President Trump still on the ballot. The Michigan case is being appealed to continue the effort to remove him.
Now more Democrats are raising voices, calling for their states to follow the Colorado decision.
California’s Democrat Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis sent a letter to California Secretary of State Shirley Weber on Wednesday asking her to explore “every legal option” to remove President Trump from the state’s 2024 presidential primary ballot.
“California must stand on the right side of history,” Ms. Kounalakis wrote. “This is not a matter of political gamesmanship. This is a dire matter that puts at stake the sanctity of our Constitution and our democracy.”
Other States
In New York, Democrat state Assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz introduced a bill Wednesday to amend the New York election law so it will require removing an insurrectionist from the presidential election ballot.
Pennsylvania Democrat state Sen. Art Haywood sent a letter Wednesday to Secretary of State Al Schmidt, citing the Colorado decision and encouraging him to disqualify President Trump from the 2024 ballot.
In an emailed statement to The Epoch Times, Mr. Schmidt said Pennsylvania’s Election Code does not give him the authority to reject a nomination petition on the grounds that a potential candidate does not meet an office’s eligibility criteria.
“In Pennsylvania, that is a question that can be answered only by the courts,” he said.
In a press call promoting his plan, Mr. Haywood, an attorney and longtime lawmaker, acknowledged there could be a question about whether the secretary of state has the authority to remove someone from the ballot, but if that is the case, he said the state attorney general would have the authority.
The concern over election integrity is not just from those who support President Trump, he said.
“My neighbors are asking me and others, how can the former president, who got engaged in insurrection, be on the ballot? This question of having qualified individuals on the ballot affects those who are either for or against the former president,” Mr. Haywood said, adding that we must follow the Constitution even when it is unpopular.
He is not worried about disenfranchising voters who support President Trump; removing him is for their protection, he said.
“To have election integrity we need to have folks who are qualified to be on the ballot. … The United States Constitution says that if you violate your oath of office by engaging in insurrection, you are disqualified,” Mr. Haywood told The Epoch Times. “It is for the protection of all voters, even those who may support President Trump, to see that one who is involved in insurrection is not on the ballot.”
He used the example of Alexander Stephens, vice president of the Confederacy. If he had run for president after the Civil War, he would have been disqualified under this same provision, even though there were many people who supported him.
“So the fact that you have supporters cannot be more significant then election integrity,” Mr. Haywood said. He added there are some other paths to pursue to remove President Trump from the ballot, but he believes his current strategy has the best chance for success.
The Insurrection
The question of how to define and label the assembly of thousands of Trump supporters at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, has been argued since it happened, with the left labeling it an insurrection, and the right calling it something more like a protest or a rally.
Mr. Haywood has been calling it an insurrection for at least a year. Because the definition is a matter of controversy, he was asked where the events of Jan. 6, 2021, were officially defined in law as an insurrection.
The Colorado Supreme Court and a lower court confirmed it was an insurrection, he said.
“I am relying upon two court decisions for the determination that there was an insurrection,” Mr. Haywood said. “But principally the Colorado Supreme Court came to the conclusion that the conduct was insurrection. And that was the foundation for their decision that it was a violation of Section Three of the 14th Amendment.”
Supporters could still write in President Trump on their ballots, but write-in candidates traditionally have a harder time getting elected and would likely be subject to legal challenge.
From The Epoch Times
