Trump: For Now, Off in Maine, On in California

The Fourteenth Amendment provides the basic rules of birthright citizenship, the rights of citizens, rules of due process and equality, and apportionment requirements. 

(Note to Nikki Haley: The Fourteenth Amendment arose from the aftermath of the Civil War. The end of slavery, the basic foundation of the conflict, was not enough. More had to be done to protect blacks and address the defeated people who fought the conflict.)  

The third and fourth sections are more obscure though debt ceiling fights have made the validity of the debt provision more well known. Now we are talking about the insurrection disqualification rule. Last applied (dubiously) to one person for acts during WWI.

[Note: See here. A minor official was disqualified for his actions during 1/6. The disqualification was generally a preventive bar after the Civil War. It does not seem that many people actually tried to get around it, requiring enforcement actions.] 

Congress could have passed legislation (one or more bills were posed) to provide some clarity, including a means for the attorney general to bring action to enforce it. None were passed unlike a move to address the counting of electoral votes. So, we are left with competing state actions. 

After the Colorado Supreme Court kept Trump off the ballot, the possibility of a Supreme Court review seemed much more likely. A few other state courts went another way. The matter is complicated by different state laws, including when (primary or general election?), who (courts, the secretary of state, or someone else), and how (what sort of process?) to challenge someone's right to be on the ballot. This will result in different results.

Lawfare has a convenient tracker. The last two state results provided conflicting bottom lines. The Maine Secretary of State (chosen by the legislature) applied state law in a well-argued (IMHO) opinion to keep Trump off the ballot. She also disposed of a trivial (if amusing) argument that Trump is barred by the 22nd Amendment since he claimed to win twice. Meanwhile, California with different rules went another way.

Note that the states that so far said Trump can be on the ballot did not firmly say he is qualified for the general election. The issue at hand is the primary ballot. Also, the dissents to the Colorado ruling split on their rationales. It is possible that some other process would be satisfactory. 

Some liberals are somewhat unexcited by the Maine ruling. Let it be noted that it is not final. The Maine Supreme Court might overturn it. I think saying it is "defensible" is damning it with faint praise. As to its value in the big picture, life is a matter of a million pushes and pulls. It also should be noted (like Colorado) that the January 6th Committee's report played an important role. For those who poo-pooed its importance.

I think it is appropriate and at least somewhat helpful. Make him seem legally tainted. And, this time it is not "the courts" but a representative of the legislature from the state with Susan Collins as a senator.  Let's avoid 14A, sec. 3 stupidity. Plus, it is not about "Democrats relying on this." OTOH  it is part of the Constitution. Maybe, sometime, a provision (see also, emoluments, impeachment, oath requirements, etc.) will count. 

No specific Supreme Court news to report for this week. The Chief Justice's End of the Year report should drop during the weekend.

Where did 2023 go? Is it 2025 yet?