NYC Bar Association urges Supreme Court for prompt decision on Trump’s eligibility for presidency

January 19, 2024 Robert Abruzzese, Courthouse Editor

The New York City Bar Association has filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court, urging a swift resolution on former President Donald Trump’s (seen here) eligibility for the presidency, following the Colorado Supreme Court's decision that he is ineligible under the 14th Amendment due to insurrection attempt, which the court agreed he engaged in by a “preponderance of the evidence.”Photo: Matt Rourke/AP

The New York City Bar Association has filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court, urging a swift resolution on former President Donald Trump’s (seen here) eligibility for the presidency, following the Colorado Supreme Court's decision that he is ineligible under the 14th Amendment due to insurrection attempt, which the court agreed he engaged in by a “preponderance of the evidence.”
Photo: Matt Rourke/AP

Share this:

The New York City Bar Association announced on Thursday that it has filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court, calling for a swift decision on former President Donald Trump’s eligibility to be on the ballot for the presidency.

This move comes in the wake of the Colorado Supreme Court’s finding that Trump is ineligible under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, a clause that addresses the qualifications for office of those who have taken part in insurrection or rebellion against the U.S.

“The City Bar submits this brief as amicus curiae because it believes the constitutional issues before the court should be decided in a manner and on a schedule that permits voters throughout the nation to cast informed ballots with a uniform understanding of who the eligible candidates are for the presidency,” said the brief, which was filed “in support of neither party.”

The City Bar, representing more than 23,000 members, emphasizes the urgency for a unified national standard regarding ballot eligibility to prevent a chaotic patchwork of state-level decisions. Its brief, taking no sides in the case of Donald J. Trump v. Norma Anderson, et al., highlights the necessity of this decision for voters to have a clear understanding of eligible presidential candidates.

In September 2023, a lawsuit was filed in Colorado by six voters, including four Republicans and two unaffiliated voters, seeking to prevent former President Trump from appearing on the state’s Republican presidential primary ballot, citing the Fourteenth Amendment.

Colorado state District Court Judge Sarah B. Wallace ruled in November that Trump must remain on the ballot, but acknowledged he engaged in insurrection by a preponderance of the evidence.

The Colorado Supreme Court subsequently reversed this decision in a 4-3 ruling, disqualifying Trump from the primary ballot. The case, now appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court as Trump v. Anderson, is set for hearing on Feb. 8, with various amicus curiae briefs filed in support of Trump by the Republican National Committee, several state attorneys general and others.

The decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, which granted a writ of certiorari for Trump’s appeal, will be the first instance of a presidential candidate’s disqualification under the 14th Amendment due to insurrection against the United States.

According to court documents from the Department of Justice and reports by The New York Times, Donald Trump, after his election loss, actively encouraged his followers via Twitter (now known as X) to protest in Washington, D.C., on January 6, 2021, with messages like “Be there, will be wild!”

In the weeks leading up to the insurrection attempt, he continued to echo this date, spreading false claims about the election results in states such as Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Nevada and Arizona. His persistent calls and a speech near the White House, where he urged his supporters to “take back our country,” led to militant groups and QAnon-affiliated organizations planning a gathering at the Capitol, ultimately resulting in a violent storming of the building by his supporters.

The City Bar’s brief argues for the Supreme Court to promptly address and resolve the constitutional questions raised by the Colorado court’s decision. It stresses the importance of a timely ruling, not just for the general election, but for the impending primary elections as well.

Leave a Comment

Click here to cancel reply.