lighting
Donald Trump unelectable? Understand everything about the highly anticipated Supreme Court decision
In the United States, the Supreme Court is preparing to determine whether Donald Trump can run for president. While Colorado and Maine have taken the unprecedented decision to declare him ineligible in their respective states, could the highest American court really remove the Republican candidate from the race for the White House?
Republican presidential candidate and former United States President Donald Trump speaks during the Iowa caucus watch party in Des Moines, Iowa, U.S., January 15, 2024. REUTERS - EVELYN HOCKSTEIN
By: Caroline Renaux Follow
Advertisement
Read more
One month before Super Tuesday, the highlight of the primaries, could Donald Trump be declared ineligible for the United States presidential election? This is the question that the Supreme Court will have to answer from February 8. If the former president denounces “
attempts to disqualify the ballots
”
in a brief
presented to the highest judicial body in the country, this decision could well shake up the process of nominating the Republican candidate for the 2024 presidential election. Explanations.
What do we blame Donald Trump for?
On December 19, the Supreme Court of the State of Colorado created a surprise by declaring the former tenant of the White House ineligible for the presidency because of his role in the assault launched against the Capitol by his supporters, the January 6, 2021 in Washington. To do so, she invoked Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution, which prohibits those "
taking an oath
[...]
to defend the Constitution
" from holding federal office if they have "
engaged in insurrection or rebellion
” against the country.
Thus, this local court was the first in the country to rule that the great Republican favorite could not appear on the primary ballot in his state. It was then followed by the state of Maine, which issued a similar decision on December 28. Voted after the Civil War, “
this is an amendment that has never been implemented for a president of the United States
,” specifies Sébastien Natroll, independent journalist specializing in subjects of American law.
Enough to arouse the ire of Donald Trump's spokesperson, Steven Cheung, who immediately denounced a "
profoundly undemocratic decision
", while announcing that they were going to take the matter to the Supreme Court of the United States. On January 5, it
agreed to rule on the question of the candidate's ineligibility
, which will be examined from February 8 in a public hearing.
Could he be disqualified by the Supreme Court's decision?
In this election year, the decision regarding the ineligibility of the 45th President of the United States will undoubtedly be the most important case handled by the Supreme Court. Two options are presented to the court: it can rule that Donald Trump actually participated in an insurrection, thus making him ineligible for the presidency, or conversely reject the decision formulated by Colorado and Maine. If legal professionals recognize a third possible path, that of declaring that the decision falls within the exercise of the electoral law of each State, it is, according to them, unlikely that it will be retained. “
It is hard to imagine the Court saying that there are different standards from one State to another. Under the 14th Amendment, either Trump is eligible or he is not, and this question will likely be decided definitively
,” explains Brian Kalt, professor of constitutional law at Michigan State University.
However, it could prove difficult for the Court to decide in favor of one option or the other, as this legal jurisdiction is as improbable as it is unexplored. “
The 14th Amendment is very ambiguous and doesn't give us any procedures, so we have to figure out how to convict someone of insurrection, whether there needs to be a law passed in Congress first, and whether it applies to the president
“, explains Brian Kalt. At the same time, each interpretation of the amendment is subject to divergences, particularly on the definitions of the words “oath” and “insurrection”.
Can the events of January 6 be compared to those described by the 14th Amendment, promulgated following the Civil War? Does the Supreme Court have the capacity to rule on political questions when it was prohibited from doing so under the “political question doctrine”? Should we instead let voters decide given the strong polarization of the United States and the risk of being accused of bias? “
The
Supreme Court has many loopholes
,” summarizes Sébastien Natroll.
These are also widely exploited by Donald Trump's lawyers, who point out that the text simply mentions "
an officer of the United States
" having taken an oath to "
support the Constitution
". “
Some law professors believe that the qualification of officer of the United States does not apply to the president, who is not explicitly cited in the text
,” reports Sébastien Natroll. “
Several case laws suggest that United States officers are appointed and not elected
», explains the specialist journalist.
In their appeal of the Colorado lawsuit, Donald Trump's lawyers also claimed that the former president did not take an oath to "
support
" the Constitution. Instead, during his inauguration in January 2017, he swore to “
preserve,
protect
and
defend
it.”
» during his mandate. So many points of tension which make it difficult to remove the name of the Republican candidate from the ballot papers. “
Eligibility for the presidency is usually cut and dry: someone has to be 35, and if they're not, they can't be president and that's it. Because of the ambiguity of the issue, if the Court is unsure of what decision to make, it generally tends to let the voters decide
,” adds Brian Kalt.
Are there similar cases in other states?
If states such as Louisiana and New Jersey have already rejected legal actions concerning the eligibility of Donald Trump for the next presidential election, official challenges to the Republican's candidacy have been filed in at least 35 states
according to New York Times
. The Supreme Courts of Michigan and Minnesota, for their part, declared that the former president could appear on the primary ballot in those states.
Formal challenges to Donald Trump's presidential candidacy have been filed in at least 35 states. © Studio RFI
However, decisions made at the local level remain subject to approval by the Supreme Court, which has the final say on questions of constitutional law. “
If the Supreme Court overturns the Colorado decision, all other states considering preventing Trump from voting will follow the Supreme Court's ruling and reject attempts to make him ineligible
,” comments Brian Kalt. The Oregon Supreme Court even chose, on December 12,
not to rule on
Donald Trump's eligibility before the top of the judiciary ruled in the Colorado case. “
Most states prefer to wait rather than make every effort and take the political risk of making a decision that could in any case be overturned by the Supreme Court
,” believes the professor.
If the Supreme Court does not rule before Super Tuesday on March 5, when fourteen states will hold their primaries simultaneously, Donald Trump's name will be on the ballot. In the event of ineligibility, it will be up to the Republican Party to decide how to reallocate the delegates won by the former president.
Newsletter
Receive all the international news directly in your inbox
I subscribe
Follow all the international news by downloading the RFI application
Share :
Continue reading on the same themes:
UNITED STATES
Donald Trump
USA Elections 2024
our selection
On the same subject
Interview
Republican primaries in the United States: “Nikki Haley seems to benefit from a favorable dynamic”
Portrait
Ron DeSantis, the Republican who wants to be Trump instead of Trump