In a new attempt to block Donald Trump , the Michigan Supreme Court has dismissed attempts to remove the former president from the state's 2024 ballots. The complainants alleged that Trump would be an insurrectionary candidate for allegedly participating in the altercations that occurred on January 6, 2021 at the Capitol.
This judicial ruling contrasts with that issued by the Colorado Supreme Court , which decided a few days ago - by virtue of the third section of the Fourteenth Amendment - to prohibit Trump from appearing on the state's ballots for next year's primaries.
"Significantly, Colorado's election laws differ from Michigan's laws in a material way that is directly relevant to explaining why the appellants in this case are not entitled to the relief they seek in connection with the presidential primary election in Michigan," said the state Supreme Court judge Elizabeth Welch .
Colorado decision "is being ridiculed and mocked around the world"
The former president used his profile on his platform, Truth Social , to react to the ruling in his favor by the Michigan Supreme Court:
The Michigan Supreme Court has forcefully and rightly rejected Democrats' desperate attempt to remove the leading candidate in the 2024 presidential election, me, from the ballot in the Great State of Michigan. This pathetic election-rigging tactic has failed across the country, even in states that have historically leaned heavily Democratic.
Trump added that the decision made by the Colorado Supreme Court " is being ridiculed and mocked around the world ." He also stated that "we have to prevent the 2024 elections from being rigged and stolen like the 2020 elections were stolen."
Trump violated the Fourteenth Amendment
The group Free Speech For People was the one who decided to file a lawsuit - on behalf of the state's voters - to have Trump not appear on the Michigan ballot, based on the same reasons used by the Colorado complainants: the former president violated the third section of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Free Speech For People issued a statement after learning of the Michigan Supreme Court ruling. In it, the group accused the Court of "failing to address any issue arising from the Constitution of the United States ." Its director, Ron Fein, expressed his disappointment with the judicial resolution:
We are disappointed by the Michigan Supreme Court's decision. The ruling conflicts with long-standing United States Supreme Court precedent that makes clear that when political parties use the state's electoral machinery to select, through the primary process, their candidates for the general election, They must comply with all constitutional requirements in that process.
Aside from the resolutions issued by the Supreme Court of Colorado and Michigan, in other states - such as Texas or Wisconsin - similar complaints are in process.
