Former President Donald Trump’s legal team, in a recent legal brief filed with the Supreme Court, called for overturning Colorado’s decision to keep former President Donald Trump from voting, citing ” attacked the charges.
As Breitbart News reported in December, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that “the Constitution’s ‘insurrection clause’ bars former President Donald Trump from voting in the 2024 presidential election.” The decision was made in a 3-3 opinion.
“The court finds by clear and convincing evidence that President Trump engaged in insurrection as those terms are used in Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.” ruling To read.
The ruling partially overturns a November ruling by Colorado District Court Judge Sarah Wallace, who said in the case of former President Trump that he was not a defined U.S. official. The court ruled that the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution did not apply. When the amendments were ratified after the Civil War.
As expected, the former president’s legal team appealed the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking to overturn the Colorado ruling. Trump’s lawyers argued in legal briefs filed in January that the former president never encouraged his supporters to enter the Capitol on January 6th, peacefully and patriotically. He added that he called for their voices to be heard.
“President Trump never told his supporters to enter the Capitol, and neither in his Ellipse speech nor in any of his statements or communications before or after did he lead or direct the illegal activity that occurred at the Capitol.” “The events of January 6, 2021.”
“President Trump also sent out tweets throughout the day instructing his supporters to ‘stay peaceful.'”[s]”Please be peaceful,” he said, adding that he released a video asking the crowd to “go home now.” “Calling for peace, patriotism, and respect for law and order, and directing the Secretary of Defense to do what must be done to protect the American people, is in no way inciting or participating in ‘insurrection.’ do not have.”
Trump’s lawyers then targeted Professor Peter Simi, who said this was because the former president used “code language” with his supporters before the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. He claimed that it constituted a “rebellion.”
“This court recognizes that a candidate’s presidential eligibility may be determined or influenced in any way by the testimony of a sociology professor who claims to have the ability to decipher ‘encoded’ messages. should not be done,” the brief states.
“The fact remains that President Trump did not commit or participate in the illegal activities that occurred at the Capitol, and this court does not agree with the trial court’s assessment of the testimony and claims of expert witnesses that cast doubt on the nominee’s eligibility for office. We cannot tolerate a system that allows us to be swayed.”President Trump has telepathic powers.”
The legal brief also notes that Trump’s comments leading up to the riot would have been considered “benign” if they had been uttered by someone else, and the state of Colorado told the court that “Mr. We hope to establish a specialized legal interpretation.” The First Amendment was invoked because the sociology professor opined that he was speaking in “coded” language to his constituents. ”
The case is trump vs andersonU.S. Supreme Court No. 23-719.
Director Paul Roland Bois award-winning feature film, exampleYou can watch it for free. YouTube or Tubi. “Better than Flower Moon’s killer.” Mark Judge wrote. “I’ve never seen a story like this before.” Christian Toto wrote. High quality, ad-free streams are also available for purchase at: google play or Vimeo On Demand. Follow him on Twitter @prolandfilms or instagram @prolandfilms.
