Donald Trump. Image: GETTY IMAGES
The appeal of Donald Trump’s ballot postpones-Maine’s top court.
A Maine court has postponed making a decision on whether Donald Trump can run in the state’s presidential primary until after the Supreme Court renders a decision in a Colorado case that is comparable to this one.
Citing the insurrection clause of the 14th Amendment, officials eliminated Mr. Trump from the ballot in both states.
However, earlier this month, the US Supreme Court declared that it will consider his appeal against the prohibitions. On February 8, Washington’s justices will hear arguments in the case.
Those who have “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” are prohibited from holding federal office by the 14th Amendment, however the attorneys for the former president contend that the president is exempt from this clause.
In a 17-page filing on Wednesday, Maine Superior Court Judge Michaela Murphy stated that Secretary of State Shella Bellows’ decision to remove Mr. Trump from the primary ballot should be postponed until federal clarification on the roles of the states is obtained.
Judge Murphy stated that “unless the Supreme Court before that date finds President Trump disqualified to hold the office of president, eligible Maine voters who wish to cast their vote for him in the primary will be able to do so, with the winner being determined by ranked-choice voting” .
The motion stated that “while it is impossible to know what the Supreme Court will decide, hopefully it will at least clarify what role, if any, state decision-makers, including secretaries of state and state judicial officers, play in adjudicating claims of disqualification brought under Section Three of the 14th Amendment.
” Super Tuesday, March 5th, is the date of Maine’s primary election. On that day, votes will be cast in about 16 states and territories.
When she declared last month that she would take Mr. Trump off the ballot, Ms. Bellows referred to the events of January 6, 2021, as “unprecedented and tragic”.
They were an assault on the rule of law as well as the Capitol and public servants, the author argued.
“The evidence presented here shows that the outgoing President ordered them to happen, knew about them, and supported them. As required by Section 336 of the US Constitution, I must take action in response to any attack on the fundamentals of our government.
However, Mr. Trump’s attorneys have disputed that he participated in insurrection and have attempted to show that the measures do not apply to the presidency.
Additionally, they have attempted to claim that progressive Democrat Ms. Bellows harbours biases against the previous president.
The secretary of state was described by Mr. Trump’s legal team as “a biassed decision maker who should have recused herself and otherwise failed to provide lawful due process” in an 11-page appeal filed with the Maine Superior Court.