A CNN panel on Thursday predicted doom for the Colorado legal team attempting to keep former President Donald Trump off the state’s primary ballot.
The U.S. Supreme Court began hearing oral arguments on Thursday for a lawsuit challenging the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision to remove Trump from the ballot under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which states no person should hold elected office if they “have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”
“It did not seem to me as though anybody in Colorado should be popping their champagne,” CNN host Jake Tapper said.
“No, they should put those bottles away. And the reason is you have some pretty clear indications here that the court was not swayed by this idea that Colorado wins, if that’s the right term, to decide for the entire nation,” CNN anchor Laura Coates responded. “They talked about it being nationalistic to do so. And also, about this idea of, ‘Hold on a second, how can we decide this without having to determine what it means to engage in an insurrection? How do we get there? How does an individual state make this conclusion and still have the Constitution protected?’ This is not a good sign for the Colorado decision to try to remove him from the ballot.”
CNN legal analyst Steve Vladeck said the court may unanimously vote in favor of Trump’s team, with the left-leaning justices hinting during oral arguments that they do not believe Colorado can make such a weighty decision for the entire nation.
One of CNN’s other legal analysts, Elie Honig, said that if the court rules in favor of Colorado, it would set a precedent allowing states to remove certain candidates from ballots in the future, which Honig said “would be a problem politically.” (RELATED: ‘I’m Not Gonna Say This Again’: Justice Gorsuch Chides Colorado Lawyer After Leaving Him Tongue-Tied)
“And they also talked about the possibility that — well, if one state, one pivotal swing state disqualifies a candidate, that could swing the election of the president who serves the entire country,” Honig said. “So as much as there was deep dives there on the legalese and the ancient cases, to me what drives these Supreme Court justices is pragmatism and practicality.”
During the arguments, Justice Elena Kagan, who former President Barack Obama appointed to the court, told Jason Murray — the attorney representing Colorado — that he has to make the case for “why a single state should decide who gets to be president of the United States.” Murray disagreed with her framing, telling Kagan that it ultimately falls to the Supreme Court to “settle” the eligibility question for the rest of the country.
Attorney George Conway said Murray’s argument was not “sufficient,” because the court “does not want to go down the path of disqualification.” Conway then predicted that the Supreme Court will not weigh in on key disputes over the 14th Amendment but will instead offer “a much narrower opinion saying the states cannot individually do this, and state functionaries and state courts can’t do it.”
CNN host Kasie Hunt said Kagan’s argument echoed many elected Democrats, including California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who decided to keep Trump on the ballot and allow voters to decide.
Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows ruled for Trump to be disqualified from the state ballot in late December under the 14th Amendment, though Trump’s lawyers have also challenged that decision. Election officials in California and Illinois ruled to keep Trump on the primary ballot.