Current:Home > ContactMichigan Supreme Court rejects bid to keep Trump off 2024 primary ballot -WealthMindset Learning
Michigan Supreme Court rejects bid to keep Trump off 2024 primary ballot
View
Date:2025-04-14 20:11:48
Washington — The Michigan Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected an appeal from a group of voters in the state who challenged former President Donald Trump's candidacy for the presidency under the Constitution's "insurrection clause."
In a brief order, the state high court denied a request from four voters to review a Michigan Court of Appeals decision that allowed Trump to remain on the Republican presidential primary ballot. The Michigan Supreme Court, composed of seven justices, said it is "not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this court." The order was not signed, and a vote count was not noted.
The decision means that Trump's name will be listed on Michigan's presidential primary ballot. The primary is scheduled for Feb. 27.
One justice, Elizabeth Welch, dissented and wrote the only legal issue properly before the state supreme court is whether the lower courts erred in finding the Michigan secretary of state lacks the authority to exclude Trump's name from the presidential primary ballot. Welch wrote that she agrees with the Court of Appeals that Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson must place Trump on the primary ballot regardless of whether he is disqualified from holding office under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, known as the "insurrection clause."
Under Michigan law, Welch wrote, "the secretary of state is not legally required to confirm the eligibility of potential presidential primary candidates. She lacks the legal authority to remove a legally ineligible candidate from the ballot once their name has been put forward by a political party in compliance with the statutes governing primary elections."
Trump praised the Michigan Supreme Court for its decision, saying in a social media post it "strongly and rightfully denied the Desperate Democrat attempt" to remove him from the ballot.
The decision from Michigan's top court comes one week after the Colorado Supreme Court found that Trump is disqualified from holding office under the Constitution's "insurrection clause." Though the Colorado high court ordered Trump's name to be kept off the state's presidential primary ballot, it paused its decision until Jan. 4 to allow him time to appeal.
Trump's campaign has said it intends to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the Colorado Supreme Court's decision. Colorado's primary is scheduled for March 5.
The Michigan case was brought by four voters in the state on behalf of Free Speech for People, an advocacy group that is behind challenges to Trump's eligibility for the White House in several states. The group argued that the former president is disqualified from public office under Section 3 because of his conduct surrounding the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.
Enacted after the Civil War, Section 3 of the 14th Amendment bars anyone who has sworn an oath to support the Constitution and engaged in insurrection against it from holding federal or state office.
Unlike in Colorado, the Michigan Court of Claims did not conduct a trial or reach the question of whether Trump was disqualified under the insurrection clause. Instead, Judge James Robert Redford dismissed the case on technical grounds, finding it involved a political question that cannot be decided by the courts and concluding that the political parties determine their presidential candidates for the primary.
A three-judge Court of Appeals panel agreed with the lower court in rejecting the challenge to Trump's candidacy, finding that the Michigan secretary of state's role in the context of presidential primary elections is limited and, beyond publishing a list of potential candidates, "purely administrative."
The head of each political party ultimately identifies which candidates will be placed on the primary ballot, the judges said.
"The Secretary of State's role in presidential primary elections is chiefly that of an administrator," the Court of Appeals panel concluded. "In particular, when it comes to who is or is not placed on the primary ballot, the statutory scheme leaves nothing to the Secretary of State's discretion. As the Court of Claims explained, who to place on the primary ballot is determined by the political parties and the individual candidates."
The judges wrote it would be "improper" to decide whether to declare Trump ineligible for the presidency at this time.
"At the moment, the only event about to occur is the presidential primary election. But as explained, whether Trump is disqualified is irrelevant to his placement on that particular ballot," the appellate court found.
The cases in Michigan and Colorado are among others brought in more than two dozen states that seek to keep Trump off the 2024 ballot because of his actions surrounding the Jan. 6 riot. Many, however, have been dismissed, while secretaries of states in places like New Hampshire and Oregon have said they don't have the authority to exclude Trump from the ballots in their states.
The decision from the Colorado Supreme Court finding Trump cannot hold the presidency was unprecedented and marks the first time a presidential candidate has been deemed ineligible for the White House under Section 3.
Trump's expected appeal of that ruling sets up a politically charged showdown before the Supreme Court that has huge implications for the 2024 presidential election.
- In:
- Donald Trump
- Michigan
Melissa Quinn is a politics reporter for CBSNews.com. She has written for outlets including the Washington Examiner, Daily Signal and Alexandria Times. Melissa covers U.S. politics, with a focus on the Supreme Court and federal courts.
TwitterveryGood! (1)
Related
- The 'Rebel Ridge' trailer is here: Get an exclusive first look at Netflix movie
- Will AT&T customers get a credit for Thursday's network outage? It might be worth a call
- USWNT vs. Mexico: Live stream, how to watch W Gold Cup group stage match
- Economists see brighter outlook for 2024. Here's why.
- Intel's stock did something it hasn't done since 2022
- Michigan man gets minimum 30 years in prison in starvation death of his disabled brother
- Returning characters revive 'The Walking Dead' in 'The Ones Who Live'
- NFL scouting combine 2024: How to watch workouts for NFL draft prospects
- Paula Abdul settles lawsuit with former 'So You Think You Can Dance' co
- NFL scouting combine 2024: How to watch workouts for NFL draft prospects
Ranking
- Louisiana high court temporarily removes Judge Eboni Johnson Rose from Baton Rouge bench amid probe
- Reddit's public Wall Street bet
- Officials honor Mississippi National Guardsmen killed in helicopter crash
- New York City honors victims of 1993 World Trade Center bombing
- How breaking emerged from battles in the burning Bronx to the Paris Olympics stage
- Police ID suspects in killing of man on Bronx subway car as transit officials discuss rising crime
- Francia Raísa Gets Candid on Her Weight Fluctuation Amid PCOS Battle
- We Went Full Boyle & Made The Ultimate Brooklyn Nine-Nine Gift Guide
Recommendation
Newly elected West Virginia lawmaker arrested and accused of making terroristic threats
William H. Macy Shares Rare Update on Life With Felicity Huffman and Their Daughters
Fort Wayne Mayor Tom Henry says he has late-stage stomach cancer
Jason Momoa's 584-HP electric Rolls-Royce Phantom II is all sorts of awesome
The GOP and Kansas’ Democratic governor ousted targeted lawmakers in the state’s primary
Returning characters revive 'The Walking Dead' in 'The Ones Who Live'
Wendy Williams documentary deemed 'exploitative,' 'disturbing': What we can learn from it.
'Just so excited man': Chicago Cubs thrilled about return of free agent Cody Bellinger