February 08 2024

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments today in the case of Colorado’s 14th Amendment ballot disqualification. Legal experts agree that section 3 of the 14th Amendment does not disqualify President Donald Trump from the ballot.


Kurt Lash, professor at the University of Richmond School of Law and the author of the law paper “The Meaning and Ambiguity of Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment": “The Supreme Court should take the case and reverse the Colorado Supreme Court ruling... Despite extraordinary efforts by researchers, no one has yet found evidence that any ratifier even considered the possibility that Section 3 abridged the people’s right to choose their president.” 



Colorado Supreme Court Justice Carlos Samour: "The decision to bar former President Donald J. Trump (“President Trump”)—by all accounts the current leading Republican presidential candidate (and reportedly the current leading overall presidential candidate)—from Colorado’s presidential primary ballot flies in the face of the due process doctrine."



Jonathan Turley, professor at the George Washington University School of Law: "I think that it’s unfounded both constitutionally and historically. I also think it’s perhaps the most dangerous legal theory to come up in years.


Steven Calabresi, professor at the Northwestern University School of Law: "President Donald Trump isn’t covered by the Disqualification Clause, and he is eligible to be on the ballot in the 2024 presidential election."


Lawrence Lessig, professor at Harvard Law School: "Section 3 cannot police a contest over an election."


Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law Professor emeritus: "The decision by the all-Democrat Supreme Court of Colorado to remove Donald Trump from the ballot is among the most undemocratic and unconstitutional rulings that I have ever read in my 60 years of teaching and practicing law.”


Michael McConnell, professor at Stanford Law School: "It is not obvious that partisan officials in state governments, without specific authorization or checks and balances, should apply broad and uncertain definitions to decide who can run for office in a republic, when responsible officials with clear statutory and constitutional authority have not done so."









Back to News