In an unprecedented ruling, the Colorado Supreme Court has barred former President Donald Trump from the state's 2024 Republican primary ballot. The court's decision, which was accompanied by a 4-to-3 vote, stated that Trump's actions amounted to insurrection and therefore disqualified him from holding federal office under the 14th Amendment. This ruling has sent shockwaves throughout the political and legal landscapes and is expected to be contested in the U.S. Supreme Court.

Derek Muller, a law professor at the University of Notre Dame, called the Colorado Supreme Court's decision a major and extraordinary holding. He noted that no presidential candidate has ever been excluded from the ballot under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. Muller also emphasized that this ruling would likely put pressure on the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case.

The majority opinion of the Colorado Supreme Court stated that Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election results constituted engaging in an insurrection. They argued that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which bars insurrectionists from federal office, including the presidency, disqualified Trump from holding the office of president. The court acknowledged the weight and magnitude of the questions at hand but emphasized their duty to apply the law without fear or favor, regardless of public reaction.

However, the court did provide Trump with a provisional escape route. They put their ruling on hold until January 4th, anticipating that Trump would appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court. If he seeks review, his name will remain on the primary ballot until the justices act. This means that the Colorado Republican primary, scheduled for March, could proceed unaffected.

The interlocking legal issues of this case are novel, complex, and of extraordinary consequence. Courts in other states have come to differing conclusions on some of the questions raised, making it likely that the U.S. Supreme Court will have to grapple with these issues. Additionally, the justices may be wary of taking away from the voters the decision of how to assess Trump's conduct after the 2020 election.

Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which forms the basis of the Colorado Supreme Court's ruling, bars individuals who engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the U.S. from holding office if they had sworn an oath to support the Constitution. While Congress can remove this prohibition with a two-thirds vote in each chamber, the provision continues to hold force. Scholars have debated the interpretation of this provision, with some arguing that it applies to elected officials, including the presidency, while others believe it is limited to appointed officials.

The Colorado Supreme Court also addressed several other issues in its ruling. They stated that Congress does not need to take action to disqualify candidates and that Trump's eligibility is not a political question outside the competence of courts. They also determined that the House's January 6th report was properly admitted into evidence and that Trump's speech on that day was not protected by the First Amendment. The court affirmed that states are authorized under the Constitution to assess the qualifications of presidential candidates.

This case has drawn comparisons to Bush v. Gore, the 2000 Supreme Court decision that ultimately decided the outcome of the presidential election. However, the current political instability in the United States adds an additional layer of precariousness to the situation.

The Colorado Supreme Court's ruling is not the final word on the matter, as Trump has vowed to appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court. The outcome of this case could have a transformative effect on the 2024 election, as it will determine whether the Republican front-runner can remain in the race as primaries begin in early states. The U.S. Supreme Court's decision to take on this case is almost certain, according to election law experts.