Colorado’s Anti-Trump Ironies

The all-Democrat Colorado Supreme Court last week took from the State’s voters a right to vote for Donald Trump. This brazen, unilateral act of disenfranchisement by four of seven anti-Trump justices is as ironic as it is unconstitutional.

Why is the decision to disqualify Trump as an “insurrectionist” under Section 3 of the 14^th Amendment (1866) so ironic? Five reasons.

First, the Framers of the 14^th Amendment inserted the “insurrection” clause with specific intent, nothing to do with public protests, even mobs of disaffected voters.

Their intent, the only purpose for “insurrection” was inserted, was to prevent former Confederate leaders, guilty of killing 620,000 Americans, from holding office after receiving a presidential pardon from Andrew Johnson.

The “insurrection” to which they referred was not general, random, political, or passing. It was the Civil War, a four-year conflict that ripped the nation apart, led to the death of a president, and put America at near-war for another 50 years.

The Civil War was not a ballot count controversy, similar to dozens on record for presidential campaigns. It was not a brief mob scene, reckless riot of no lasting consequence – since digital copies of ballots existed in 2021 – across the nation.

To pretend the 2021 riot, full of people with no intention of violently overthrowing the American way of life or government, not armed or seeking a confederacy, who had not killed 620,000 Americans, is somehow an “insurrection” of the kind the writers of that 14^th Amendment meant – mocks the Civil War and 14^th Amendment.

For State Supreme Court justices, who went to law school and learned all this, who put their antipathy for one candidate above their learning, oath, and history, is ironic.

Second, for four Colorado justices – directly contradicted by three others – to pretend they could disenfranchise 6 million Colorado citizens, a state 31 percent Democrat, 27 percent Republican, is also ironic – and arrogant to the point of impeachable.

In fact, the disenfranchisement of one state’s voters in a contest for president disenfranchises all Americans, since one state can tip the balance. For four arrogant justices to pretend innocence, when guilty of “election interference” is more than ironic. It is repugnant.

Third, while Section 3 of the 14^th Amendment addresses Civil War holdovers, Confederates part of the most horrific war in American history, Section 1 – ironically – assures this exact kind of arbitrary, politically-motivated, and anti-constitutional deprivation of voting rights, shall never happen in America.

It reads: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States,” and their specific meaning was the right to vote.

So, now we have four robed state partisans misapplying the 14^th Amendment against a political foe, declaring Colorado Republicans cannot vote for the candidate of their choice, potentially depriving the nation of its choice. Irony on irony!

Fourth, ironic as anything, for these partisans to rule as they did, they had to violate fundamental principles of jurisprudence, innocence before guilt, right to confront one’s accusers, defend a claim, due process, and equal protection.

These four Colorado partisans had to reach so far outside the legal norm that they stepped all over the former president’s rights. There has been no finding by the US Supreme Court of “insurrection,” nor that his political speech was “insurrection.”

There has been no adjudication of the word “insurrection” in any setting save the politically motivated, highly inflammatory congressional hearings led by arch-partisan, anti-Trump Democrats – their own integrity now under fire.

There is even a case before the US Supreme Court – and was at the time of this Colorado ruling – questioning the partisan, evidence-light prosecutions of January 6^th protestors, and the implications for those politicizing the law.

Fifth, the transparent objective of this Colorado court majority – which has disgraced itself and their state – was plainly to trigger suits in other states to effectively interfere with – that is, to subvert – the democratic election process.

This fifth irony is borderline “insurrection” itself, as insurrection is a coup or attempt to undermine majority rule illegally by anyone, including a judge.

But, when all is said and done, the real question is not about irony. Humanity is self-absorbed, fallen. Many in power abuse their authority for attention, enrichment, and craven political ends.

The real question is how fast the US Supreme Court will reverse, legal effect it will have on other states, and political effect on the 2024 election. Beware the ironies!

A level-headed guess is that the High Court reverses swiftly, ends this gimmick in other states, and probably – again ironically – produces a favorable uptick for Donald Trump. Call that irony number six. Why? Decisions rich in irony backfire.

Robert Charles is a former Assistant Secretary of State under Colin Powell, former Reagan and Bush 41 White House staffer, attorney, and naval intelligence officer (USNR). He wrote “Narcotics and Terrorism” (2003), “Eagles and Evergreens” (2018), and is National Spokesman for AMAC.