'That’s what we call democracy': Internet rejoices as US Supreme Court rules Donald Trump will remain on Colorado ballot

The decision comes as a massive win for Donald Trump and settles the longstanding debate of whether he violated the 'insurrectionist clause' included in the 14th Amendment
PUBLISHED MAR 5, 2024
Donald Trump will be appearing on the ballot for the Colorado GOP primary (Getty Images)
Donald Trump will be appearing on the ballot for the Colorado GOP primary (Getty Images)

NEW YORK CITY, NEW YORK: The US Supreme Court unanimously ruled that former president Donald Trump should appear on the ballot in Colorado on Monday, March 4, 2024, reported CNN.

The decision comes as a massive win for Trump and settles the longstanding debate of whether he violated the “insurrectionist clause” included in the 14th Amendment.

However, it will not have any impact on his four ongoing criminal cases, including the one dealing with federal election subversion.

Reacting to the ruling, Trump posted on Truth Social, "BIG WIN FOR AMERICA!!!"

In December 2023, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that Trump was disqualified from holding the presidency under the insurrection clause, and ordered his name be taken off the upcoming Republican primary ballot.

In a statement issued on Monday, Colorado's Secretary of State Jena Griswold said, "The United States Supreme Court has ruled that states do not have the authority to enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment for federal candidates. In accordance with this decision, Donald Trump is an eligible candidate in Colorado’s 2024 Presidential Primary."

Justices were divided over the sweep of the order

When it came to the effect of the ruling, the justices were divided 5-4, with the majority stating that no state could dump a federal candidate off any ballot, without Congress first passing legislation.

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh noted, "We conclude that States may disqualify persons holding or attempting to hold state office. But States have no power under the Constitution to enforce Section 3 with respect to federal offices, especially the Presidency."

“Nothing in the Constitution delegates to the States any power to enforce Section 3 against federal officeholders and candidates,” they added.

On the other hand, Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson stated that the majority, “shuts the door on other potential means of federal enforcement," adding, "We cannot join an opinion that decides momentous and difficult issues unnecessarily.”

In a corring opinion, Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote that the case “does not require us to address the complicated question whether federal legislation is the exclusive vehicle through which Section 3 can be enforced.”

Internet reacts to US Supreme Court's decision on Trump appearing on Colorado ballot

Social media users lauded the top court ruling to get Trump back on the state ballot.

"Unanimous decisions underscore the strength of our legal system's impartiality," wrote a user.



 

"The Supreme Court’s decision could not be more clear. Liberal politicians don’t get to take candidates they don’t like off ballots. The choice is for the people. That’s what we call democracy," Senator Josh Hawley said.



 

"Maybe that will help restore faith in the justice system. lets see," commented another.



 

"Too bad the decision doesn't come with any punishment for the activist judges," one social media user wrote.



 

"It’s always been the Supreme Court to hold the political branches and inferior courts in check. That’s kinda the point of separation of powers and the judiciary structure with one Supreme Court. We should celebrate when our system of government works as intended," stated one user.



 

This article contains remarks made on the Internet by individual people and organizations. MEAWW cannot confirm them independently and does not support claims or opinions being made online.

GET BREAKING U.S. NEWS & POLITICAL UPDATES
STRAIGHT TO YOUR INBOX.

MORE STORIES

Michael Steele said that Donald Trump, within six months in office, struck at institutions which left them cowering 'in a corner' instead of resisting
11 hours ago
David Carr vowed to counter socialist-inspired proposals like city-run grocery stores, calling them a failed ideological experiment
1 day ago
Marco Rubio confirmed the Trump admin had ended ties with 66 global groups, citing taxpayer accountability and rejecting 'ineffective' institutions
1 day ago
Chris Murphy proposed a bill to curb DHS powers by banning face coverings, limiting interior raids, and boosting transparency after Renee Good's death
1 day ago
Federal Judge Arun Subramanian issued a 14‑day restraining order, saying states had met the legal threshold to preserve aid programs
1 day ago
Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins cited Feeding Our Future, housing aid abuse, and daycare fraud probes to justify the funding freeze
1 day ago
Jack Smith's team welcomed public scrutiny, with attorney Lanny Breuer noting he had long offered to testify openly and never resisted transparency
2 days ago
Eric Swalwell and Dan Goldman proposed the 'ICE OUT Act' as lawmakers aimed to strip ICE officers of qualified immunity, citing accountability gaps
2 days ago
The Clinton postponed their December depositions with Bill's rescheduled for January 13 and Hillary's for 14, but neither have confirmed attendance
2 days ago
Judge Lorna Schofield blocked John Sarcone's IRS request, ruling only a lawfully appointed US Attorney could authorize disclosures
2 days ago