In yet another almost unimaginable moment in America’s troubled recent history, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that former Pres. Donald Trump is barred from being on the Republican primary ballot in that state. The court found that Trump engaged in insurrection and, as a result, is not eligible to again serve as president of the United States.

Trump has already indicated that he plans to appeal Colorado’s decision to disqualify him to the United States Supreme Court. When the court hears the case it will be presented with an opportunity to weigh in on the question of Donald Trump’s responsibility for the events of January 6, 2021 and whether the Constitution means what it says in Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

Not since the court put its thumb on the electoral scale in its 2000 Bush v Gore decision has there been a case that would do more to thrust the court into the raging fires of political controversy in this deeply divided nation. As he has on many other occasions, Chief Justice John Roberts may respond to that possibility by invoking so-called “judicial minimalism.” He may try to rally a majority of his colleagues to make a decision that avoids a definitive resolution of the Trump case on the merits. Following his lead, they may be tempted to find some narrow or technical ground on which to decide the appeal from the Colorado decision and avoid facing head-on this most divisive of cases and controversies.

They should resist the temptation.

This country needs a clear resolution of the question of whether Donald Trump is indeed eligible to hold office under the Constitution. Without it, a shadow will continue to hang over the 2024 election. But such a decision would be a risky one for the court, whether it comes out for or against Trump.

Related

Before looking more at that risk, let me say a bit more about judicial........

© Salon