Michigan court rejects bid to bar Trump from 2024 ballot

The decision contrasts with the recent ruling from the Colorado Supreme Court, which kicked Mr. Trump off the state's primary ballot over his role in the Capitol riot, which he is accused of inciting.

Published - December 28, 2023 03:40 am IST - Washington

Former President Donald Trump reacts to supporters during a commit to caucus rally, on Dec. 19, 2023, in Waterloo, Iowa.

Former President Donald Trump reacts to supporters during a commit to caucus rally, on Dec. 19, 2023, in Waterloo, Iowa. | Photo Credit: AP

The Michigan Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected a bid to remove Donald Trump from the crucial swing state's primary ballot next year over his role in the 2021 storming of the U.S. Capitol.

Opponents of the Republican former president wanted judges to force election officials to determine whether Mr. Trump's efforts to overturn his defeat in 2020 and the riot in Washington should make him ineligible to run again.

But the high court said in a brief ruling it was "not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this court" ahead of Michigan's February 27 presidential primary.

It was the latest in a series of bids to block Mr. Trump from appearing on primary ballots in multiple states under the 14th Amendment, which says officials who take an oath to support the U.S. Constitution are banned from future office if they "engaged in insurrection."

The decision contrasts with the recent ruling from the Colorado Supreme Court, which kicked Mr. Trump off the state's primary ballot over his role in the Capitol riot, which he is accused of inciting.

The Michigan lawsuit was filed in September by Free Speech For People, a pro-democracy advocacy group that also pursued an unsuccessful 14th Amendment challenge against Mr. Trump in Minnesota and has filed a case in Oregon.

Michigan's lower courts dismissed the case on procedural grounds early in the process, a decision upheld on appeal, meaning the question of whether Mr. Trump engaged in insurrection was never addressed.

Justice Elizabeth Welch, one of four Democratic-nominated justices on the seven-member panel, acknowledged the Colorado decision but said that state's election law differed from Michigan's "in a material way" in requiring candidates to be "qualified" to run.

"The appellants have identified no analogous provision in the Michigan Election Law that requires someone seeking the office of President of the United States to attest to their legal qualification to hold the office," Welch wrote.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.