As the Colorado Supreme Court wrote, January 6 meets the bar for insurrection āunder any viable definitionā of the term. The legal scholar Mark Graber, who has closely studied the Fourteenth Amendmentās history, argues that āinsurrectionā should be understood broadlyāan act of organized resistance to government authority motivated by a āpublic purpose.ā That certainly describes the Capitol riot, in which a violent mob attacked law enforcement and threatened members of Congress and the vice president in order to block the rightful counting of the electoral vote and illegally secure the victory of the losing candidate. The historical record also suggests that the amendmentās requirement that a prospective officeholder must have āengaged in insurrectionā should also be understood broadlyāmeaning that Trumpās speech on the Ellipse that morning and his encouragement of the rioters while they smashed their way through the Capitol more than fit the bill.
Where in the 14th amendment does it require a separate trial? Nowhere. And, regarding Colorado since Iām more familiar with the situation here, in what way is the process of our legal system evaluating evidence and hearing arguments and rendering a ruling on whether the 14th applies and whether or not Trump took part in insurrection somehow insufficient to meet due process?
Because the original court case did just that. Heard the expert testimony, consulted historical law, and decided two things: did Trump participate in insurrection as the term was intended by the 14th (ruling: Yes) and does the 14th apply in this situation of removing Trump from the ballot (ruling: No). The CO Supreme Court then agreed with the first ruling and overruled the second (e.g. Yes it applies).
A criminal trial isnāt necessary to determine this eligibility because this isnāt about crime and punishment. It is about eligibility to be elected president.
Also not a lawyer.
Ok that is a very important detail of which I was not aware. I had heard that the District Court decided he could stay on the ballot because it thought the President was not an officer (which as a matter of law is just a ridiculous conclusion). I didnāt hear that he actually had decided it was insurrection first.