Current:Home > MyMichigan Supreme Court rejects bid to keep Trump off 2024 primary ballot -WealthSpot
Michigan Supreme Court rejects bid to keep Trump off 2024 primary ballot
View
Date:2025-04-24 18:09:34
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! (1874)
Related
- South Korea's acting president moves to reassure allies, calm markets after Yoon impeachment
- 5 takeaways from the front lines of the inflation fight
- Kate Spade 24-Hour Flash Deal: This $360 Backpack Is on Sale for $79 and It Comes in 8 Colors
- Long-lost Core Drilled to Prepare Ice Sheet to Hide Nuclear Missiles Holds Clues About a Different Threat
- Whoopi Goldberg is delightfully vile as Miss Hannigan in ‘Annie’ stage return
- There's a shortage of vets to treat farm animals. Pandemic pets are partly to blame
- Biden cracking down on junk health insurance plans
- These could be some of the reasons DeSantis hasn't announced a presidential run (yet)
- Toyota to invest $922 million to build a new paint facility at its Kentucky complex
- U.S. expected to announce cluster munitions in new package for Ukraine
Ranking
- The city of Chicago is ordered to pay nearly $80M for a police chase that killed a 10
- Q&A: A Human Rights Expert Hopes Covid-19, Climate Change and Racial Injustice Are a ‘Wake-Up Call’
- Kristin Davis Shares Where She Stands on Kim Cattrall Drama Amid Her And Just Like That Return
- Retail spending dips as holiday sales bite into inflation
- Why Sean "Diddy" Combs Is Being Given a Laptop in Jail Amid Witness Intimidation Fears
- Washington Commits to 100% Clean Energy and Other States May Follow Suit
- How Johnny Depp Is Dividing Up His $1 Million Settlement From Amber Heard
- Deep Decarbonization Plans for Michigan’s Utilities, but Different Paths
Recommendation
Sarah J. Maas books explained: How to read 'ACOTAR,' 'Throne of Glass' in order.
Taylor Swift releases Speak Now: Taylor's Version with previously unreleased tracks and a change to a lyric
RHONJ: Teresa Giudice and Joe Gorga Share Final Words Before Vowing to Never Speak Again
Warmer Temperatures May Offer California Farmers a Rare Silver Lining: Fewer Frosts
Meet first time Grammy nominee Charley Crockett
These $23 Men's Sweatpants Have 35,500+ 5-Star Amazon Reviews
Lily-Rose Depp Shows Her Blossoming Love for Girlfriend 070 Shake During NYC Outing
Taylor Lautner’s Response to Olivia Rodrigo’s New Song “Vampire” Will Make Twihards Howl