# Various states, including Colorado, determine Trump is disqualified from holding office **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Tags:** trump\ **Created:** [August 11, 2023, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/various-states-including-colorado-determine-trump-is-disqualified-from-holding-office/988412 "2023-08-11T16:27:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 48
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2024, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/various-states-including-colorado-determine-trump-is-disqualified-from-holding-office/988412/942 "2024-01-06T12:52:48Z")
Looking at a less highly-charged example: Ted Cruz. Suppose someone had challenged his eligibility, arguing he was not a « natural born citizen », as required by the Constitution. The facts there are pretty clear: - Ted was born in Canada and was a Canadian citizen from the moment of his birth. - His mom was a US citizen, his dad was not, at the moment of his birth. - Under US citizenship law, he was a US citizen at birth, by virtue of his mother’s citizenship. Question: given those facts, is Ted a « natural born citizen »? That term is not defined by the constitution, but it is a legal term. A court faced with Ted’s case would have to decide the legal meaning of the term, independently of the facts of the case, and then apply that meaning to the facts. Since that analysis requires legal determinations, that part of a trial court’s decision would be subject to appellate review. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2024, 1:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/various-states-including-colorado-determine-trump-is-disqualified-from-holding-office/988412/943 "2024-01-06T13:05:32Z")
> [@asterion](#): > > How about a decision that the 14th Amendment Section 3 is self executing but only if there has been a criminal conviction? That nicely sidesteps the actual issue while sounding reasonable. So Robert E. Lee could have run for Congress in 1866? Not convicted of insurrection, so his actions in the late unpleasantness wouldn’t matter? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2024, 1:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/various-states-including-colorado-determine-trump-is-disqualified-from-holding-office/988412/944 "2024-01-06T13:07:55Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > So Robert E. Lee could have run for Congress in 1866? As I understand it, yes. Wait, when was the 14th Amendment passed? ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2024, 1:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/various-states-including-colorado-determine-trump-is-disqualified-from-holding-office/988412/945 "2024-01-06T13:10:00Z")
Sorry, meant to say in 1868. The 14th was ratified in July 1868, so would have applied to congressional elections in the fall of 1868. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2024, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/various-states-including-colorado-determine-trump-is-disqualified-from-holding-office/988412/946 "2024-01-06T13:20:48Z")
> [@Peter\_Morris](#): > > By the way, folks, what exactly does “self executing” mean? For example, section 1 of the 14th Amendment creates rights to due process and equal protection of the law. Those rights can be enforced through the courts without any need for federal legislation. Section 1 also provides that, generally, anyone born in the US is a citizen. No federal legislation is needed to implement that provision. Section 3 is the insurrection disqualification clause. The issue is whether it stands on its own and can be enforced by the executive and the courts without the need for federal legislation, in the same way as the provisions of s. 1. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2024, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/various-states-including-colorado-determine-trump-is-disqualified-from-holding-office/988412/947 "2024-01-06T13:49:38Z")
> [@MulderMuffin](#): > > I don’t see much reason for them to take up the question if they don’t intend to do _something_ about it. They didn’t wait for the appeals court to rule before deciding to accept the case, so presumably they see the need for moving quickly before the question becomes moot. Wait, I must have missed that: Did they, in fact, take up the case? I haven’t seen any news about that. ---
**Author:** ![Moriarty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/moriarty/32/49_2.png) [@Moriarty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moriarty)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2024, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/various-states-including-colorado-determine-trump-is-disqualified-from-holding-office/988412/948 "2024-01-06T14:16:51Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Did they, in fact, take up the case? I haven’t seen any news about that. It was reported yesterday. > **[Supreme Court says it will decide if Trump qualifies for Colorado ballot](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/01/05/supreme-court-trump-colorado-ballot-insurrection/)** > > The Colorado Supreme Court had barred Donald Trump from the ballot, citing the 14th Amendment and saying he engaged in an insurrection around Jan. 6, 2021. ---
**Author:** ![Son\_of\_a\_Rich](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/son_of_a_rich/32/5439_2.png) [@Son\_of\_a\_Rich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Son_of_a_Rich)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2024, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/various-states-including-colorado-determine-trump-is-disqualified-from-holding-office/988412/949 "2024-01-06T15:18:17Z")
When they scan the defense table, Habba always assumes the determined pursed duckface. That’s how you can tell she’s a serious lawyer. ---
**Author:** ![thorny\_locust](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thorny_locust/32/431_2.png) [@thorny\_locust](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thorny_locust)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2024, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/various-states-including-colorado-determine-trump-is-disqualified-from-holding-office/988412/950 "2024-01-06T15:20:12Z")
> [@Atamasama](#): > > > [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > > > I agree it should be Federal (how can someone be eligible for President in some states but not others) and this would allow SCOTUS to not have to rule directly on his eligibility. > > The same way abortion is legal in some and not others. Not comparable. The POTUS is the president of the entire country. Any individual abortion affects at most a handful of people. ---
**Author:** ![asterion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4da419/32.png) [@asterion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asterion)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2024, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/various-states-including-colorado-determine-trump-is-disqualified-from-holding-office/988412/951 "2024-01-06T15:22:10Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > So Robert E. Lee could have run for Congress in 1866? Not convicted of insurrection, so his actions in the late unpleasantness wouldn’t matter? Didn’t say I agreed with the idea. Just that I could see the court punting in that way. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2024, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/various-states-including-colorado-determine-trump-is-disqualified-from-holding-office/988412/952 "2024-01-06T15:38:08Z")
Sure, but for the Court to go that way, they have to consider that sort of issue, in analysing s. 3. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2024, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/various-states-including-colorado-determine-trump-is-disqualified-from-holding-office/988412/953 "2024-01-06T16:00:37Z")
> [@Atamasama](#): > > The same way abortion is legal in some and not others. Not even remotely close. The rules on eligibility is in the US Constitution. Saying the eligibility requirement can vary from state to state is like saying the popular election of Senators can vary from state to state and if your state legislature wanted they could appoint the Senators. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2024, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/various-states-including-colorado-determine-trump-is-disqualified-from-holding-office/988412/954 "2024-01-06T16:02:47Z")
There is another way SCOTUS can punt. They can say it is up to Congress but Congress already acquitted Trump of insurrection therefore he is eligible. Don’t blame us, blame Congress. ---
**Author:** ![jsc1953](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/5daacb/32.png) [@jsc1953](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsc1953)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2024, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/various-states-including-colorado-determine-trump-is-disqualified-from-holding-office/988412/955 "2024-01-06T16:07:29Z")
This would not surprise me. However, nowhere in the 14th does it give Congress the power to determine eligibility. For the SCOTUS to do so would require citing the MSU\* Law book. \*Making Shit Up. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2024, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/various-states-including-colorado-determine-trump-is-disqualified-from-holding-office/988412/956 "2024-01-06T16:13:53Z")
> [@jsc1953](#): > > For the SCOTUS to do so would require citing the MSU\* Law book. Or call it a political question ---
**Author:** ![outlierrn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/outlierrn/32/3005_2.png) [@outlierrn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/outlierrn)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2024, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/various-states-including-colorado-determine-trump-is-disqualified-from-holding-office/988412/957 "2024-01-06T17:58:13Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > So Robert E. Lee could have run for Congress in 1866? Not convicted of insurrection, so his actions in the late unpleasantness wouldn’t matter? This is what confuses me, that in the aftermath of the civil war they would have intended individual states to determine their own candidates eligibility. ---
**Author:** ![Biffster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biffster/32/339_2.png) [@Biffster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biffster)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2024, 4:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/various-states-including-colorado-determine-trump-is-disqualified-from-holding-office/988412/958 "2024-01-07T04:39:58Z")
> [@thorny\_locust](#): > > Not comparable. The POTUS is the president of the entire country. Any individual abortion affects at most a handful of people. In any event, he could be on the ballot and even win the contest. He just wouldn’t be able to hold office—the real issue at stake here. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2024, 5:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/various-states-including-colorado-determine-trump-is-disqualified-from-holding-office/988412/959 "2024-01-07T05:01:50Z")
> [@Moriarty](#): > > I, personally, still think this is a state by state determination. A question (genuine, not meant rhetorically) for those who argue that his disqualification under 14A _should_ be decided at a state level, with individual states potentially coming to different determinations - what exactly happens if half the states decide he’s disqualified, but he wins anyway? The implications of accepting the absence of any consistent federal process to determine disqualification are now fully manifest. Must the states who deemed him disqualified under 14A now just shrug and accept that a Constitutionally disqualified candidate is their president? If so, how was it ever meaningful to say that the states were separately empowered to make this determination in the first place? ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2024, 6:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/various-states-including-colorado-determine-trump-is-disqualified-from-holding-office/988412/960 "2024-01-07T06:28:23Z")
Perhaps those states do not send electors to congress for certification at all. Or send electors for the qualified candidate with the most votes But yes if one state only (CO) deems Trump ineligible, and he wins anyway, there does not seem there is much they can do. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2024, 6:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/various-states-including-colorado-determine-trump-is-disqualified-from-holding-office/988412/961 "2024-01-07T06:32:48Z")
Not that the principle is any different, but it could be many states, not just one. It seems to me that this undermines the idea that no process at the federal level is empowered to “tell the states what to do” with respect to 14A. Either some kind of federal determination binds all states at the outset, or a federal determination (the election result) binds all states at the outcome. You cannot avoid one or the other. And it certainly feels inconsistent with the principle that it’s up to a state to determine 14A disqualification if that state might eventually be forced to accept a president that they have disqualified. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/various-states-including-colorado-determine-trump-is-disqualified-from-holding-office/988412.md?page=47) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/various-states-including-colorado-determine-trump-is-disqualified-from-holding-office/988412.md?page=49)