U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse

(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Jena Griswold

60%

60%

40%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Alexis King

(D) Brian Mason

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line

(D) George Stern

(D) A. Gonzalez

(R) Sheri Davis

40%

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%

30%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Joe Salazar

50%

40%

40%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
December 21, 2023 09:35 AM UTC

Kudos: The Colorado Supreme Court Did Its Job

  • 13 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

Tuesday’s decision by the Colorado Supreme Court to prevent Donald Trump from appearing on the 2024 Presidential ballot is a massive decision that will (likely) ultimately lead to the United States Supreme Court making a national ruling about Trump’s ability to appear on the ballot for President in other states.

Regardless of your opinion on the decision, it’s worth taking a moment to appreciate that the Colorado Supreme Court made a difficult decision instead of doing the same thing that too many judges do when faced with complicated questions on elections or campaign finance: Punt.

It’s easy to refuse to rule on a matter of law related to an election by muttering, “Let the voters decide.” Judges in Florida, Michigan, and Minnesota all punted on similar cases related to Trump’s eligibility for the 2024 election, using technicalities to avoid making tough decisions and falling back on the idea that voters should be the final arbiters of the law. It’s what judges often do on questions about a candidate’s residency and/or regarding campaign finance violations. And it’s wrong.

It’s ridiculous to argue about whether or not the Colorado Supreme Court SHOULD have made a ruling in this case, which is what Trump defenders such as Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-ifle) have been doing since Tuesday:

Rep. Lauren Boebert opposes the Constitution

 

This is actually much less complicated than Boebert makes it out to be. The problem isn’t that the Colorado Supreme Court ruled against Trump; the problem is that Trump incited an insurrection, which the Constitution plainly describes as a reason to exclude someone from running for federal office.

Either laws exist, or they don’t.

Either the Constitution is a document that we should follow, or it isn’t.

If you believe in laws and the Constitution, then you must support the application of these rules. OF COURSE the Colorado Supreme Court should have issued a decision in this case. That’s literally why courts exist: To interpret laws and statutes. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that all citizens must approve of a court’s decision; if that were the case, then again, there would be no point to even having a court.

It is an abdication of responsibility and a mockery of both our system of law and form of government for courts to shrug off election-related decisions that fall to them. Just as Sheriffs shouldn’t be free to pick and choose which laws they choose to enforce, judges shouldn’t vacillate on doing their job depending on the difficulty of the question. The Colorado Supreme Court did its job, and we should be proud of that.

Republican bellyaching about the Colorado decision and defense of Trump is also chock full of contradictions — from Trump himself. As Aaron Blake writes for The Washington Post:

Trump on Tuesday night derided the ruling as “eliminating the rights of Colorado voters to vote for the candidate of their choice.” But not only did Trump try to overturn the will of voters after the 2020 election, he has on myriad occasions pushed the idea that candidates should be disqualified irrespective of the voters’ will.

That was basically the thrust of Trump’s rise to political prominence. He built a base in the early 2010s with the ugly and false “birther” campaign, whose entire premise was that Barack Obama wasn’t eligible to be president. [Pols emphasis]

For the purposes of this writing, it’s instructive to remember that Trump has very much approved of the idea of removing candidates from the ballot based on Constitutional grounds — from Obama and Hillary Clinton to Ted Cruz and Anthony Weiner. The only reason he disagrees now is because it’s a lot less fun when you’re on the other side of the argument.

The Colorado Supreme Court DID ITS JOB in interpreting the law and making a decision on Trump’s eligibility for the 2024 Presidential election. When the U.S. Supreme Court inevitably takes up the question, it will also be doing what it is supposed to do.

Either laws exist, or they don’t.

Either the Constitution is a document that we should follow, or it isn’t.

These are the only questions that matter here. Kudos to the Colorado Supreme Court for answering those questions.

Tweet
Share

Comments

13 thoughts on “Kudos: The Colorado Supreme Court Did Its Job”

  1. It is my opinion, based on the historical pattern, that the Colorado Supreme Court did more to help Trump than hurt him in this ruling, and if the pattern continues as it has with each indictment, raid, and lawsuit, I predict Trumps approval ratings will rise after this decision. 

  2. Of course, Trump’s approval will rise among Trump cultists and the nattering nabobs of Negevism.

    But that is a majority (~. 60% of a minority ( Registered Republicans in the USA – 29%)

    On policy, 3/5 Americans favor Democratic economic policies more. Don’t look for confirmation on your cable news, though. 

    Latest polling showing Trump cultists are exact opposites of majority of Americans in Trump approval https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/favorability/donald-trump/

      1. This is no doubt true to some level. Voters in states like Ohio and Wisconsin overwhemingly support weed, abortion and other liberal polices but rarely or only sometimes back Democratic candidates who will gladly legalize all that and more. To point out Ohio again, the GOP governor there was re-elected in a landslide back in 2022. This despite him being against abortion, weed and other popular polices voters want. This despite abotion and legal weed being backed by large margins earlier this year. The personalities and percieved reputation of candidates are often more important to voters than the abstract and wide ranging policies a party generally advocates for.

        The average voter doesn't deeply research all the positions a candiate or their party advocates for. The average voter is not some politico who dwells in political blogs all the time to know the stark differences and controversial histories of candidates and parties. The average voter doesn't pick up a polictial science book and relize how dangerous someone like Trump and right-wing politics are getting. The average voter won't be that diretcly or immediately affected if abstract insitutions we consider needed for political stabillty wither away. The average voter is struggling to pay biils and necessities and dread going to a job that pays them peanuts and wondering if the future will be worth it. That anxiety will determine what voters choose. Thinking of how'll they will survive weeks, months and years from now will decide. I'm just afraid they will choose wrong and we won't be able to turn back anymore.

    2. 100% this. This is what I trying to say in other posts. Trump was of course always going to get support from the GOP, this was never going to change. He was far ahead of other Republican candidates since he announced his intention to run again. If Trump were to win in 2024, it’ll be because Dems sat out the election and Biden being a utter failure not becasue voters are clamoring to have him back and support his policies and that of the GOP. If 2022 showed me anything, Democratic policies and Democrats who aren’t Biden are popular, much more so than the incumbent president. Voters cleatly dislike Biden but they don’t dislike Democrats and their policies. National Dems along with Biden should GTFO and let a proper Democrat run. I guarentee this hypothetical Democrat will be far more popular than Biden even as a candidate and have a far better chance of winning.

      1. You have any evidence that “other Democrats” are more popular than Biden?  Nationwide, among those who know who they are?  And though it would be somewhat difficult to measure, would any of them continue to be AFTER a primary campaign as they were beating up on Biden and each other? 

        If it ever was possible to have a campaign starting now, those days are gone.  To be serious, there would have needed to be a campaign kick-off at least as early as DeSantis, Haley, and Christie began.  And yet, the political pros who would have needed to be on board as campaign managers, fund-raisers, and candidates ALL did not feel there was enough there to actually announce a campaign. Well, except for the kinda, sorta, “I could be talked into it,” song and dance of Joe Manchin. Who doesn’t yet have a campaign in place.

        Biden & his team think they can win.  LOTS of other Democrats think Biden-Harris can win.  People who donate large amounts of money think Biden-Harris can win.  Polls of registered voters who are certain to or likely to vote seem to think Biden can win.  So who is the Democrat you think more likely to win against Trump & the RNC? 

        1. I echo your question about who that "proper" Democrat might be.

          Air Slash has lots of opinions, but isn't particularly good at explaining those opinions. So far, he/she seems more like a concern troll, trying to scare Dem voters away from Joe Biden.

          I just want everyone to remember where we were when the Orange Destruction and his crime family left the White House. Joe Biden has been an excellent president. He just gets shit done.

  3. The best thing you can do with fascists is hit them as hard as you can, whenever you can. And not worry if they will whine about it.

    The fact that the decision enrages Trump followers is irrelevant, they will never be lacking something to be enraged about.

    I am deeply grateful that the court ignored the partisan caterwauling and took a stand for the rule of law and the Constitution on a matter of such grave importance. Let the wingnuts tantrum as they always do, this decision was necessary, important, and defensible on the merits and the law

  4. Both the Republicans (predictably) and the media (alas, also predictably) are failing to note that this suit was brought by Republicans, not Democrats.

    We must remind people of that every chance we get.

     

     

    1. In the shifty, raccoon eyes of Orange Jesus, they were not Republicans but RINOs who, according to F.D.F.Q., are beneath contempt.

      The only real Republicans are the folks from MAGA world.

  5. Spot on MM. But it's "Librul Judges that done it" so it won't matter.

    In the end, once SCOTUS rules on this it's a footnote to history. I don't see any way it stands.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

62 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!