A Colorado judge on Friday ruled that former U.S. President Donald Trump “engaged in insurrection” on January 6, 2021 but allowed him to remain on the state’s 2024 presidential ballot due to a disupted technicality that critics hope will be reversed on appeal.
Judge Sarah Wallace’s 102-page ruling states that Trump’s January 6 speech near the White House “incited imminent lawless
violence.”
“Trump did so explicitly by telling the crowd repeatedly to ‘fight’ and to ‘fight like hell,’ to ‘walk down to the Capitol,’ and that they needed to take back our country’ through ‘strength,'” she wrote. “He did so implicitly by encouraging the crowd that they could play by ‘very different rules’ because of the supposed fraudulent election.”
BREAKING: Court finds Donald Trump engaged in insurrection while president https://t.co/H0BPSFhwjt
Wallace continued:
In the context of the speech as a whole, as well as the broader context of Trump’s efforts to inflame his supporters through outright lies of voter fraud in the weeks leading up to January 6, 2021 and his longstanding pattern of encouraging political violence among his supporters, the court finds that the call to ‘fight’ and ‘fight like hell’ was intended as, and was understood by a portion of the crowd as, a call to arms.
The court further finds, based on the testimony and documentary evidence presented, that Trump’s conduct and words were the factual cause of, and a substantial contributing factor to, the January 6, 2021 attack on the United States Capitol.
The advocacy group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) and two law firms representing a group of Colorado voters had argued in their suit that “Trump is constitutionally ineligible to assume the office of the president” because he “knowingly and voluntarily aided and incited the insurrection” before and on January 6.
Wow on this part of the Colorado court ruling:
"The Court finds that Petitioners have established that Trump engaged in an insurrection on January 6, 2021 through incitement, and that the First Amendment does not protect Trump’s speech."https://t.co/8QR83xaj0H pic.twitter.com/5Yvuwxun9l
Enacted after the Civil War, Section 3 of the 14th Amendment — known as the insurrection clause — bars from public office any “officer of the United States” who takes an oath to uphold the Constitution and subsequently participates in an insurrection or rebellion against the U.S. government.
Wallace found that Trump, who was still president at the time, was not “an officer of the United States,” and therefore could not be proscribed from holding office under the insurrection clause. This, despite citing examples in her ruling of times when the president has been considered an “officer.”
Legal experts said that the technicality could be overturned on appeal. Former U.S. Defense Department special counsel Ryan Goodman wrote on social media that Trump “shouldn’t be comfortable” with Wallace’s decision.
I need to read the full decision but I am gratified that the judge ruled that Trump DID participate in an insurrection.If her grounds for keeping him on the ballot are that the President is not “an officer of the United States,”she is dead wrong.
Appeal. https://t.co/R8AdqKkpmE
CREW president Noah Bookbinder said in a statement that “when we filed this case, we knew it likely would not end at the district court level.”
“We will be filing an appeal to the Colorado Supreme Court shortly,” he added. “Today was not the end of this effort, but another step along the way.”
Wallace’s decision follows a Tuesday ruling in a Michigan 14th Amendment case in which the judge declined to address Trump’s conduct while arguing that only Congress can decide whether a presidential candidate fails to meet constitutional qualifications for office, and last week’s dismissal of a similar case in Minnesota.
In closing arguments in the Colorado case, Scott Gessler, an attorney for Trump — who is far and away the frontrunner in the GOP presidential primary race — argued there is “an emerging consensus here within the judiciary across the United States.”
However as Ron Fein, legal director at the advocacy group Free Speech for People, noted after the Minnesota ruling, the state Supreme Court “explicitly recognized that the question of Donald Trump’s disqualification for engaging in insurrection against the U.S. Constitution may be resolved at a later stage.”
The stories you read here are only possible because of donations from readers like you. Our nonprofit newsroom hasn’t been devoured by a corporate conglomerate and we’re not funded by a bigwig billionaire. This radical independence means we can bring you the uncensored stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media, but it also means we depend on your support.
We need to raise $44,000 in the next 3 days in order to keep the lights on at Truthout. To help us get there, a generous donor will match new monthly donations dollar for dollar for the entire first year.
We urgently need your support to pull this off. Will you do what you can? Please make a tax-deductible monthly or one-time donation today!
Brett Wilkins is a staff writer for Common Dreams.
Colorado Judge Labels Trump’s Actions as Insurrection
6
0
19.11.2023
A Colorado judge on Friday ruled that former U.S. President Donald Trump “engaged in insurrection” on January 6, 2021 but allowed him to remain on the state’s 2024 presidential ballot due to a disupted technicality that critics hope will be reversed on appeal.
Judge Sarah Wallace’s 102-page ruling states that Trump’s January 6 speech near the White House “incited imminent lawless
violence.”
“Trump did so explicitly by telling the crowd repeatedly to ‘fight’ and to ‘fight like hell,’ to ‘walk down to the Capitol,’ and that they needed to take back our country’ through ‘strength,'” she wrote. “He did so implicitly by encouraging the crowd that they could play by ‘very different rules’ because of the supposed fraudulent election.”
BREAKING: Court finds Donald Trump engaged in insurrection while president https://t.co/H0BPSFhwjt
Wallace continued:
In the context of the speech as a whole, as well as the broader context of Trump’s efforts to inflame his supporters through outright lies of voter fraud in the weeks leading up to January 6, 2021 and his longstanding pattern of encouraging political violence among his supporters, the court finds that the call to ‘fight’ and ‘fight like hell’ was intended as, and was understood by a portion of the crowd as, a call to arms.
The court........
© Truthout
visit website
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Andrew Mitrovica
Mort Laitner
Rami G Khouri
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
Nikkei Editorial
