The Michigan Court has dismissed a bid to exclude ex-President Donald Trump from the 2024 primary ballot based on the US Constitution’s “insurrectionist ban,” CNN reported.The decision contrasts with the recent ruling from the Colorado Supreme Court, which kicked Trump off its primary ballot because of his role in the January 6 Capitol riot. That decision has been paused pending an appeal.
With these duelling decisions, the expected appeals to the US Supreme Court become even more critical, especially as the nation races toward the start of the 2024 primaries, the CNN reported.Unlike in Colorado, Michigan courts rejected the case on procedural grounds without delving into the questions of insurrection and Trump’s involvement in it.
Michigan law was compared to Colorado’s election code, and the Michigan Supreme Court’s order did not release a vote count.According to CNN, one of the Michigan justices on Wednesday wrote why Michigan is different from Colorado.The anti-Trump challengers “have identified no analogous provision in the Michigan Election Law that requires someone seeking the office of President of the United States to attest to their legal qualification to hold the office,” Justice Elizabeth Welch wrote, comparing Michigan law to Colorado’s election code, CNN reported.
The lower-court rulings in Michigan kept the door open to future 14th Amendment challenges if Trump wins the Republican nomination.On Truth Social, Trump criticised attempts to keep him off the ballot, warning of a “rigged and stolen” 2024 election.Legal challenges continue in Michigan, with Ron Fein of Free Speech For People calling the decision “disappointing” but emphasising its non-binding nature outside Michigan.
Another attorney for the challengers, Mark Brewer, said they would continue the efforts in Michigan.”The Court’s decision is disappointing but we will continue, at a later stage, to seek to uphold this critical constitutional provision designed to protect our republic,” Brewer said in the statement.The 14th Amendment challenge against Trump was filed by Free Speech For People in September, seeking to apply the “insurrectionist ban.” The vague wording of the amendment has only been applied twice since 1919, and the Michigan lawsuit was part of a broader legal strategy pursued by the group.
