Colorado Supreme Court decision
Dec. 19th, 2023 10:22 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
dmmA 4-3 decision to disqualify you-know-who from the primary ballot.
"The court stays its ruling until January 4, 2024, subject to any further appellate proceedings."
Now he-who-must-not-be-named has a choice whether to appeal this in Federal courts, but a loss there might result in a wider disqualification.
People can enjoy reading a 213-page decision, but the gist of it is pages 6-9 (pages 7-10 of the PDF file).
"The court stays its ruling until January 4, 2024, subject to any further appellate proceedings."
Now he-who-must-not-be-named has a choice whether to appeal this in Federal courts, but a loss there might result in a wider disqualification.
People can enjoy reading a 213-page decision, but the gist of it is pages 6-9 (pages 7-10 of the PDF file).
no subject
Date: 2023-12-20 04:57 am (UTC)In any case, all this is likely to be relevant only if there is an appeal to the US Supreme Court.
If you-know-who's campaign just lets this one slide, it is unlikely to impact things much (that's how logistics of the situation looks to me; this is just a single blue state, so this only affects primaries a bit; this is a state-specific law, so the decision will at best have a moderate impact; at least, one of the dissents notes on page 147: "And because most other states don’t have the Election Code provisions we do, they won’t be able to enforce Section Three").
But if there is a US Supreme Court consideration, then anything can happen including a nation-wide disqualification. Yes, that court has 6-3 Republican majority, but this does not mean that that majority is necessarily friendly to him-who-must-not-be-named. After all, the lawsuit against you-know-who was brought by a group of registered Republicans and unaffiliated voters eligible to vote in the Republican primaries in Colorado.