Maine’s Democratic Secretary of State, Shenna Bellows, has made a significant move by removing former President Donald Trump from the state’s presidential primary ballot. This decision was made based on the Constitution’s insurrection clause, which states that individuals who have been involved in an insurrection against the United States are disqualified from holding public office.
The timing of this ballot removal is crucial, as the U.S. Supreme Court is currently deliberating on whether Trump should be eligible to return to the White House. This action in Maine follows a ruling by the Colorado Supreme Court, which also removed Trump from their state’s primary ballot under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
However, it is important to note that Bellows’ ruling has been temporarily suspended until Maine’s state courts have had a chance to rule on the case. The Trump campaign has indicated that they plan to appeal this decision, which means that the final outcome is still uncertain.
Legal experts believe that the Supreme Court will ultimately have the final say on whether Trump appears on the ballot not only in Maine but also in other states. This decision could have significant implications for the race, particularly if Maine’s electoral votes play a decisive role in a closely contested election.
Bellows has acknowledged that the Supreme Court will likely have the final decision, but she believed it was her official duty to take action based on the evidence and the constitutional parameters. The Trump campaign has requested that Bellows disqualify herself from the case, but she has refused to do so.
It is worth noting that previous requests from both Democrats and Republicans to bar Trump from the ballot have been rejected, with the argument that they did not have the authority to do so without a court order. In contrast, California has certified Trump’s inclusion on the state’s primary ballot.
The Supreme Court’s decision timeline remains uncertain, but both parties involved are pushing for a quick resolution. Legal experts anticipate that the Supreme Court will accept the case, as the Section 3 cases related to the insurrection clause present a specific issue of U.S. governance that lacks clear judicial guidance.
The insurrection clause was added to the Constitution in 1868, with the intention of preventing defeated Confederates from regaining positions of power. However, following the events of the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, this clause has come to the forefront of discussions and legal actions. It remains to be seen how this specific case will be resolved and what impact it will have on the larger political landscape.
“Travel aficionado. Incurable bacon specialist. Tv evangelist. Wannabe internet enthusiast. Typical creator.”