The Michigan Supreme Court has made a significant decision regarding the 2024 election ballot, rejecting efforts to remove former President Donald Trump from the lineup. In a statement released on Wednesday, the court emphasized that it was not persuaded to review the questions presented and believed that Trump should remain on the ballot.
The court’s decision was based on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which states that an individual engaged in insurrection or rebellion after taking an oath to support and defend the Constitution is ineligible to hold office. The courts have consistently rejected efforts to take former President Trump’s name off the ballots in states like Minnesota, and Arizona.
In Minnesota, a group of voters petitioned the state’s Supreme Court to remove Trump from the GOP primary and general election ballots in 2024. However, the court ruled that significant parties could include seemingly “ineligible” candidates in the primary ballot, citing Minnesota law.
The Michigan Supreme Court’s ruling contrasts a recent historic decision by the Colorado Supreme Court. Last week, due to constitutional issues, the Colorado court prohibited Trump from running in the state’s primary in 2024. The court stated that President Trump was disqualified from holding the office of President under Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment and that it would be a wrongful act to list him as a candidate on the presidential primary ballot.
Unsurprisingly, Trump supported the Michigan Supreme Court’s decision on his Truth Social platform. He praised the court for denying the “Desperate Democrat attempt” to remove him from the ballot in Michigan. He criticized Colorado as the only state to have fallen prey to the scheme.
This latest development showcases the ongoing legal battles surrounding Trump’s eligibility for future elections. While the Michigan Supreme Court has chosen to retain his name on the 2024 ballot, other courts have taken a different approach. As the political landscape continues to evolve, it remains to be seen how these legal disputes will ultimately shape the future of American elections.