The Supreme Court must weigh whether Trump should stay in

The Supreme Court must weigh whether Trump should stay in Colorado's vote for the 2024 election – and could even decide whether there was an insurrection on Jan. 6 when a mob stormed the Capitol to protest the results

The Supreme Court is expected to consider whether Donald Trump should be barred from running for president and whether his name can be removed from Colorado's 2024 election.

Trump was declared ineligible to appear on the ballot in Colorado on December 19, and his appeal of the state Supreme Court's decision will be heard on Thursday.

The decision marked the first time in history that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment was used to disqualify a presidential candidate. The Civil War-era rule states that people who participate in an insurrection are ineligible for office.

Supreme Court justices will hear arguments from both sides on whether Trump can be kept from the vote.

The highest court could even decide whether the Jan. 6 insurrection was an insurrection, when a mob stormed the U.S. Capitol to protest the election in which Joe Biden defeated Trump in 2020.

The US Supreme Court is expected to consider whether Donald Trump should be barred from running for president and participating in the 2024 election in Colorado

Supreme Court justices (pictured) will hear arguments from both sides over whether Trump should not be allowed to run for president again and be barred from the election

Supreme Court justices (pictured) will hear arguments from both sides over whether Trump should not be allowed to run for president again and be barred from the election

They could govern even if the Jan. 6 insurrection was an insurrection, when a mob stormed the U.S. Capitol to protest the election

They could govern even if the Jan. 6 insurrection was an insurrection, when a mob stormed the U.S. Capitol to protest the election

The Supreme Court will decide whether Trump should be removed from the ballot in Colorado and whether similar attempts are allowed in other states.

The 77-year-old Republican politician is likely the front-runner to challenge the 81-year-old Biden in the upcoming general presidential election in November.

His case is progressing much faster than usual in scheduling arguments and there is pressure to make a decision before March 5. Then voters in 15 states, including Colorado, cast their ballots in the Republican primaries.

Trump's name is currently on the ballot in Colorado before the Supreme Court. Maine also considered removing Trump from its ballot, but that move was also put on hold.

It is based on a Civil War-era constitutional amendment that bars anyone from holding federal office who has “participated in insurrection or rebellion.” However, this has never been used to disqualify a candidate for president.

The 14th Amendment has been around since 1868, but the Supreme Court has never considered Section 3, the so-called Insurrection Clause.

Both sides point to historical evidence to support their interpretation of the provision, including the way it was interpreted at the time it was adopted.

The lawyers are referring to arguments made 150 years ago by Salmon Chase, a member of Abraham Lincoln's cabinet who appointed Lincoln to the Supreme Court in 1864.

Chase ruled in December 1868 on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which had not taken effect until July of that year.

Section 3 was designed after the Civil War to prevent Confederate voting.

“No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or an elector of the President or Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, in the United States, who… has taken part in any insurrection or rebellion against them, or given aid or comfort to his enemies “, it says.

Chase decided that Jefferson Davis, the defeated Confederate president, should not be prosecuted for treason.

He argued that Section 3 – barring Davis from holding office – was a form of punishment and therefore precluded any further criminal prosecution.

At the time, Chase, the former Republican governor of Ohio, was considering running for president as a Democrat and hoping to gain traction with Davis' Democratic colleagues.

The Republican politician, 77, is likely the front-runner to challenge Joe Biden, 81, in the upcoming presidential election in November

The Republican politician, 77, is likely the front-runner to challenge Joe Biden, 81, in the upcoming presidential election in November

His case is progressing much faster than usual in terms of scheduling hearings, and there is pressure for a Supreme Court decision to be made before March 5

His case is progressing much faster than usual in terms of scheduling hearings, and there is pressure for a Supreme Court decision to be made before March 5

The 14th Amendment has been around since 1868, but the Supreme Court has never considered Section 3, the so-called Insurrection Clause.  Pictured are the Capitol riots on January 6th

The 14th Amendment has been around since 1868, but the Supreme Court has never considered Section 3, the so-called Insurrection Clause. Pictured are the Capitol riots on January 6th

A year later, Chase issued a counterdecision when confronted again with the Section 3 issue.

He was asked to decide whether the conviction of a black man, Caesar Griffin, for “shooting with intent to kill” should be overturned because the judge presiding over his case was a Confederate.

In the Griffin case, Chase decided that Congress had to intervene—largely because he feared the precedent that would be set by overturning all Confederate verdicts.

Trump's lawyers now argue that the Griffin case shows that a state cannot use Section 3 as a means to disqualify someone.

In their brief, they argue that the Griffin case helps “validate the enforcement statutes of Congress as the exclusive means of enforcing Section 3.”

The argument is one of several they are making to claim that the Colorado Supreme Court overstepped the mark. They claim that Trump's behavior at the time of January 6th did not constitute insurrection.

The Colorado Supreme Court acknowledged that it was aware of the implications of its December ruling.

Salmon Chase was the Republican governor of Ohio before being appointed to Lincoln's cabinet.  Lincoln then appointed him to the Supreme Court

Salmon Chase was the Republican governor of Ohio before being appointed to Lincoln's cabinet. Lincoln then appointed him to the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court could also decide another Trump case after a federal appeals court rejected his claim of presidential immunity

The Supreme Court could also decide another Trump case after a federal appeals court rejected his claim of presidential immunity

It was ruled that he could be prosecuted for conspiring to overturn the 2020 election

It was ruled that he could be prosecuted for conspiring to overturn the 2020 election

“We are also conscious of our solemn duty to apply the law without fear or favor and without allowing ourselves to be influenced by public reaction to the decisions the law requires us to make,” the judges said.

While Trump's lawyers claimed this “unconstitutionally disenfranchised millions of voters in Colorado” and could disenfranchise millions more across the US.

The former president's claims were also supported by the top judicial officials of 27 states.

They said the ruling in Colorado would lead to “widespread chaos.” The attorneys general wrote, “Most obviously, it causes confusion in an election cycle that is just weeks away.”

“Furthermore, it confuses the respective roles of Congress, the states and the courts.”

Trump is not expected to attend the hearing to hear arguments on Thursday.

The Supreme Court could also decide another Trump case after a federal appeals court rejected his claim of presidential immunity.

It was ruled that he could be prosecuted for conspiring to overturn the 2020 election. There is a deadline of Monday to get the Supreme Court to stay this ruling.