Michigan Judge Rejects 14th Amendment Challenge and Says Trump Will Remain on Ballot

(LibertySons.org) – Some opponents of former President Donald Trump’s candidacy to hold public office again cited Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, sometimes called the Insurrection Clause, as early as a few days after the January 6, 2021, riot on Capitol Hill. However, judges in two states where voters brought lawsuits seeking to remove Trump’s name from primary ballots based on the Insurrection Clause have rejected plaintiffs’ arguments. On Tuesday, November 14, a Michigan judge became the latest to rebuff a 14th Amendment challenge, confirming the former president’s name will remain on primary ballots.

Michigan Court of Claims Judge James Redford issued his ruling and opinion on Trump v Benson, a suit filed by the former president’s legal team in response to two other lawsuits, Davis v. Benson et al. and LaBrant et al. v Benson, that sought to disqualify him from appearing on the Michigan primary ballot. The Davis and LaBrant actions asked the court to order Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson to keep Trump’s name off the primary ballot using the Insurrection Clause as justification.

Redford dismissed the Davis and LaBrant suits on November 14 when he issued his ruling on the Trump case. In his opinion, the judge raised the issue of standing. He said the court could not rule on eventualities that might never happen. He also noted that legislative bodies and processes control which candidates appear on primary ballots according to the Constitution, not executive-level administrators like the Secretary of State.

Redford called the decision of whether the courts could rule on the Insurrection Clause’s ability to disqualify Trump “a political question” that the courts can’t decide using existing legal principles. He summarized, saying Congress must determine who the statute disqualifies or when it applies.

The judge argued that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment included too many vague terms requiring interpretation and that various judgments could chaotically affect broader questions about who might qualify to run for office. He pointed out that broad questions of election qualifications had Constitutionally fallen to the legislative branch, where representatives for people from every state would have a voice in the decisions.

~Here’s to Our Liberty!