Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold (D) questioned whether or not former President Donald Trump could legally serve again in the White House. The comments came after a number of other officials, including Republicans in New Hampshire, appeared to tiptoe around the issue of constitutional eligibility.
During a CNN interview, Griswold was asked about whether or not Trump was ineligible due to a clause in the 14th Amendment. Section 3 of the amendment does not allow individuals to serve in a position of federal public trust if they had “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”
Griswold agreed with the question’s premise. She stated that the state is hoping that a recent court case would “give guidance to ballots across the nation.”
“We have never had this type of situation occur where a sitting president incites the insurrection and then had the audacity to run again. So there are real questions of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment disqualifies him,” she said. “I am looking forward to the judge giving guidance on the topic.”
A group of Colorado voters filed a legal petition against Trump’s eligibility in state court. The hearing for the suit began yesterday.
The suit’s attorney, Eric Olson, said that Trump’s actions on Jan. 6, 2021, made him ineligible for office, arguing that the former president “summoned and organized the mob.”
What they are trying to do in Colorado against President Trump is unconstitutional and has no basis.
This is politics at its worst.https://t.co/1ax0Fs1kx1
— Ryan Fournier (@RyanAFournier) October 30, 2023
Olson said that the “Constitution, the shared charter of our nation,” says that Trump cannot serve another term.
The effort was dismissed by Trump spokesperson Jason Miller. He cited the judge’s donation history and the group that filed the lawsuit.
“They send money to these dark money groups — they go to a Democratic jurisdiction and a Democratic judge,” Miller said.
Trump’s attorneys stated that the former president was engaging in free speech before the Capitol protests and that he never “engaged in insurrection.”
Later this week, the Minnesota Supreme Court will open arguments on a similar lawsuit.