Trump Dumped, But Only After Giving Him Due Process

WASHINGTON - Dec. 20, 2023 - PRLog -- The Colorado Supreme Court yesterday removed Donald Trump from the state's presidential ballot because it found that his conduct amounted to "insurrection" under the XIV Amendment, but only after fully protecting his due process rights.

This was in accordance with the legal analysis of public interest law professor John Banzhaf whose views differed from those of many other legal scholars.

On the one hand, many legal scholars have stated that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment - which bars former civilian officials from holding office if they "shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion"  against the United States government - is "self executing," and prohibits Trump from running for president again.

On the other hand, many other legal scholars argued that whatever Trump did or may have done does not and cannot disqualify him from serving, running, or appearing on the ballot.

But Professor Banzhaf offered a middle-ground analysis.  Yes, he argued, the amendment could be used to keep Trump's name off the ballot, but only if it were proven in an evidentiary proceeding that he engaged "in insurrection or rebellion."

The reason why a state cannot lawfully remove his name from the ballot in the absence of an adjudicatory due process hearing (a court trial) is that the Fourteenth Amendment provides that"nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

According to media reports, the legal analysis Banzhaf submitted to officials was instrumental in New Hampshire.

Banzhaf's legal analysis had also been featured in The Vermont Daily Chronicle: Connecticut is 13th state considering Trump ballot ban (https://vermontdailychronicle.com/banzhaf-connecticut-is-...) and was also filed with the appropriate authorities in his formal legal request that Colorado keep Trump off the ballot entitled "Formal Legal Petition, Complaint, and Demand Pursuant to Section 3 of ARTICLE XIV."

The Colorado Supreme Court made it clear that it relied upon the trial providing the necessary due process in its decision to bar Trump from the ballot, saying: "We conclude that the foregoing evidence, the great bulk of which was undisputed at trial, established that President Trump engaged in insurrection."

The activist law professor says he feels vindicated that his legal analysis apparently proved to be the correct one, and he hopes this ruling will encourage similar challenges and similar rulings in other states.

http://banzhaf.net/   jbanzhaf3ATgmail.com   @profbanzhaf