Colorado Judge Sarah Wallace’s opinion finding that Trump did engage in incitement, but can’t be disqualified because the President is not clearly an “officer” under the Fourteenth Amendment.
I'll come back to the officer part later.
Leaving the decision to remove or disallow a candidate from the ballot without a fair trial to determine guilt is open to abuse. It might get Trump off a few ballots this year, but such a precedent could provide legal cover for a swing state Sec of State or judge to keep Biden off the ballot based on allegations which might not hold up were it subject to rules of evidence.
A fair trial is foundational to our American system.
Wallace’s opinion is best understood as a punt to Colorado’s Supreme Court: a finding of facts that which they will eventually decide how to apply. She says as much in a footnote: She made the finding of fact that Trump did engage in insurrection so the Colorado Supreme Court can resolve any appeal without coming back to her.
Trump’s side did not present evidence to fight the claim of insurrection. Trump’s legal expert, Robert Delahunty presented no definition of insurrection that wouldn’t include January 6. No evidence was presented to back his claim that Trump intended to call out 10,000 members of the National Guard. Trump's side presented no evidence that criminal conviction was required before disqualification. There was no evidence presented that Trump did not support the mob’s purpose.
Finding Trump not "an officer" is a stretch given that Trump swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States when he was inaugurated POTUS on January 20, 2017.
As I wrote in the posts above this one, these suits to disqualify Trump from the ballot were brought too soon.
