Connect with us

U.S. Supreme Court

Supreme Court to consider whether Trump can be barred from ballots

Colo., Maine have banned former president on ballot

Published

on

Former President Donald Trump speaks at the Conservative Political Action Committee at National Harbor, Md., on March 4, 2023. (Screen capture via Vimeo)

The U.S. Supreme Court announced Friday that it would take up the case involving Colorado barring former President Donald Trump from appearing on the stateā€™s 2024 ballot over his actions surrounding the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol insurrection.

In a brief, unsigned order issued on Friday, the court granted the petition for review.

In their order the justices granted only the former presidentā€™s petition for review and sets the case up to be heard at a rapid pace, with oral arguments now scheduled for Feb. 8 and a decision to follow that could spark Trumpā€™s removal from the ballot in states across the country. 

Trump will file his opening brief on Jan. 18, with the response by the Colorado voters and Coloradoā€™s secretary of state to follow on Jan. 31. Trumpā€™s reply brief is due by 5 p.m. on Feb. 5, just three days before oral arguments.

Across the nation there have been dozens of challenges to the former presidentā€™s eligibility under the 14th Amendment filed, though many cases have been rejected by lower courts, The Hill noted.

But two states ā€” Colorado and Maine ā€” last month took the extraordinary step of removing Trump from the primary ballot.

Long-time Supreme Court reporter and SCOTUSblog contributorĀ Amy HoweĀ noted earlier this weekĀ that in a filing on Wednesday Trump told the justices that the ā€œColorado Supreme Court has no authority to denyā€ him a place on the stateā€™s ballot in the 2024 presidential election. Trump asked the justices to overturn a ruling by the state supreme court that would leave him off Coloradoā€™s primary ballot because of his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attacks on the U.S. Capitol.Ā 

Pointing to a Dec. 28 ruling by a Maine official that removed Trump from that stateā€™s primary ballot, Trump contended (in a filing obtained by the Washington Post) that, if allowed to stand, the Colorado courtā€™s decision could be ā€œused as a template to disenfranchise tens of millions of voters nationwide.ā€

TheĀ Coloradoā€™s High Court ruled on Dec. 19Ā that Trump is ineligible to serve as president under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which bars anyone who has served as ā€œan officer of the United Statesā€ and has previously taken an oath to support the Constitution from holding ā€œany office ā€¦ under the United Statesā€ if he has ā€œengaged in insurrection.ā€Ā 

Passed by Congress in 1866 and ratified in 1868, the provision was originally intended to disqualify individuals who had been federal (or state) government officials before the Civil War and had sworn to uphold the Constitution but then served in the Confederacy. The bar on service can only be overcome by a two-thirds vote of both the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate.

SCOTUSblog also reported:

A group of registered Republicans and unaffiliated voters eligible to vote in Coloradoā€™s presidential primary had brought the lawsuit, arguing that Trump should not be included on the stateā€™s primary ballot because as president he had sworn an oath to support the Constitution but had engaged in insurrection on Jan. 6.

After a five day trial, a lower court agreed that Trump engaged in insurrection but concluded that Section 3 does not apply to the president. Specifically, it concluded, the presidency is not an ā€œoffice ā€¦ under the United States,ā€ and the president is not an ā€œofficer of the United States.ā€

In a lengthy 4-3 decision, the Colorado Supreme Court reversed. It held that Trump was disqualified under Section 3 from serving as president and it barred the Colorado secretary of state from listing him on the primary ballot. 

The Hill reported Trump is appealing in state court Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellowsā€™ decision that would knock the former president off the primary ballot. The case could reach the justices within weeks.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

U.S. Supreme Court

Supreme Court to hear conversion therapy case in October

Harmful and discredited practice is banned in 23 states and D.C.

Published

on

The Supreme Court as composed June 30, 2022 to present. Front row, left to right: Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., Associate Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., and Associate Justice Elena Kagan. Back row, left to right: Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Associate Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, Associate Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, and Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. (Photo Credit: Fred Schilling, The Supreme Court of the U.S.)

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear a case about whether state and local governments can enforce bans on anti-LGBTQ conversion therapy for children, a discredited and harmful practice that has been banned by 23 states and D.C.

The case, which will be argued in the new term that begins in October, began in Colorado Springs, Colorado where a licensed professional counselor filed a challenge to a ban in 2022, arguing the law interferes with her ability to treat patients with ā€œsame-sex attractions or gender identity confusionā€ who ā€œprioritize their faith above their feelings.ā€ 

The Supreme Court in 2023 declined to hear a challenge to conversion therapy bans out of Washington state, but conservative justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Brett Kavanaugh voted in favor of taking up the case.

The Colorado therapist, Kaley Chiles, is represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom, which is described by the Southern Poverty Law Center as “a legal advocacy and training group that has supported the recriminalization of sexual acts between consenting LGBTQ adults in the U.S. and criminalization abroad; has defended state-sanctioned sterilization of trans people abroad; has contended that LGBTQ people are more likely to engage in pedophilia; and claims that a ā€œhomosexual agendaā€ will destroy Christianity and society.”

The U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado struck down Chiles’s lawsuit in 2022. Her case was appealed to the Supreme Court from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, which upheld the ban in 2023 on the grounds that it regulates professional conduct, not speech.

Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson released the following statement on Monday:

ā€œThe Supreme Courtā€™s decision to take up this case isnā€™t just about so-called ‘conversion therapy’ ā€“ itā€™s about whether extremists can use our courts to push their dangerous agenda, in an effort to erase LGBTQ+ people and gut protections that keep our kids safe. Thereā€™s no debate: so-called ā€˜conversion therapyā€™ is a dangerous practice, not therapy, and it has no place in our communities. These bans exist to protect LGBTQ+ children from harmā€”period.

Attacks on LGBTQ+ rights are the entry point to attacks on all of our rights. The same people trying to legalize abuse under the guise of ā€˜therapyā€™ are the ones banning books, ripping away reproductive rights, and undermining our democracy. The Supreme Court must uphold the 10th Circuit decision finding that these laws are constitutional.ā€

HRC added, “So-called ‘conversion therapy,’ sometimes known as ‘reparative therapy,’ is a range of dangerous and discredited practices that falsely claim to change a personā€™s sexual orientation or gender identity or expression.”

The group continued, “Such practices have been rejected by every mainstream medical and mental health organization for decades, but due to continuing discrimination and societal bias against LGBTQ+ people, some practitioners continue to conduct conversion therapy. Minors are especially vulnerable, and conversion therapy can lead to depression, anxiety, drug use, homelessness, and suicide.”

Continue Reading

U.S. Supreme Court

Supreme Court will not hear challenge to Tenn. drag restrictions

Republican lawmakers limited access to “adult entertainment” in 2023

Published

on

The Supreme Court as composed June 30, 2022 to present. Front row, left to right: Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., Associate Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., and Associate Justice Elena Kagan. Back row, left to right: Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Associate Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, Associate Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, and Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. (Photo Credit: Fred Schilling, The Supreme Court of the U.S.)

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear a case challenging Tennessee’s law restricting drag performances, which was enacted by Republican state lawmakers in 2023.

The Tennessee Adult Entertainment Act forbids ā€œadult-oriented performancesā€ that take place in public or where they may be seen by minors. Legislators specified the legislation was meant to target drag shows.

A judge on the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee ruled that the law was ā€œunconstitutionally vague and substantially overbroad,” allowing drag performances to continue in parts of the state. The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of AppealsĀ reversed the decision in July, however, ruling that the theater company that filed the complaint lacked standing to sue.

President Donald Trump said that his decision to name himself chair of the Kennedy Center shortly into his second term came at least partially in response to the iconic performing arts center’s history of hosting drag shows, which he called ā€œanti-American propaganda.ā€

Continue Reading

U.S. Supreme Court

Supreme Court to consider case against Montgomery County Public Schools

Plaintiffs challenging LGBTQ-specific curriculum policy

Published

on

U.S. Supreme Court (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The U.S. Supreme Court on Jan. 17 announced it will consider the case of a group of Montgomery County parents who are challenging a policy that does not allow them to “opt out” their children from classes in which lessons or books on LGBTQ-related topics are taught.

The parents in a federal lawsuit they filed in May 2023 allege the Montgomery County Public Schools policy violates their religious beliefs.

A federal judge in Maryland on Aug. 24, 2023, ruled against the parents. The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the ruling.

“Under the 4th Circuit’s reasoning, parents cannot be heard until after the damage has been done to their children,” reads the Supreme Court filing that CBS News obtained. “But there is no unringing that bell ā€” by then, innocence will be lost and beliefs undermined.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular