The majority of Americans oppose the decisions in Colorado and Maine to disqualify former President Donald Trump from the 2024 ballot. Other polls put the balance slightly in favor, but all polls show a deeply divided country on this effort. The Maine decision will now be reviewed by the Maine state courts, but the Colorado decision is scheduled for oral argument in a matter of weeks. A reversal of the Colorado decision is now supported by 27 states, which filed with the Supreme Court to oppose the underlying theory under the Fourteenth Amendment. It is relatively rare to see states opposing the expansion of their own authority vis-a-vis Congress. The brief reinforces the view of states like Colorado as outliers in the country in embracing this anti-democratic theory.
The attorneys general of Indiana, West Virginia and 25 other states, warn the court that this novel theory will produce “chaos” in the country.
Advocates are pushing this dangerous theory at a time of deepening divisions in our country. As I have previously said, the four Colorado justices are recklessly throwing matches at a powder keg. That is why I am hopeful that at least one of the liberal justices will follow the lead of the three democratically appointed Colorado justices, who dissent from this anti-democratic decision.
Here is the filing: Trump Ballot Amicus
This is a slightly off topic but tangential question.
During most of the J6 trials, the prosecution showed a selection of videos to show the rioting and violence.
Fair enough. Yet the defense asked for all of the videos so that they could mount a defense. The prosecutor gave them all the videos they had, yet claimed that they didn’t have the other videos which could have contained exculpatory evidence. This is questionable since the capitol police (law enforcement) did have hours and hours of videos of what happened during J6 protest, what is the legality of intentionally not providing all of it to the prosecution.
Apparently the J6 committee only provided the prosecutors w the incriminating videos and not all of the available videos.
The question is if this is a legal intentional end run around the Brady rule.
We’re now seeing more videos from the Capitol on J6 which does contain exculpatory information.
Granted these people entered a restricted area and caused Congress to be interrupted. However its important to note that they were not the first to do this, yet faced over prosecuting by the DoJ w support of a judge which could be accused of violating judicial canon #5.
I’m not sure why the defense could not get access to these videos. IIRC it could have been that the Capitol Police claimed that the videos contained classified security information and thus could be withheld.
So what am I missing?
Are there lawsuits now challenging the convictions?