The Colorado judge overseeing the lawsuit attempting to bar former President Donald Trump from The White House using a rare constitutional clause has issued an order prohibiting threats and intimidation regarding the case.

DENVER (AP) — The Colorado judge overseeing the first significant lawsuit to bar former President Donald Trump from the state’s 2024 presidential ballot on Friday issued a protective order prohibiting threats and intimidation in the case, saying the safety of those involved — including herself and her staff — was necessary as the groundbreaking litigation moves forward.

“I 100% understand everybody’s concerns for the parties, the lawyers, and frankly myself and my staff based on what we’ve seen in other cases,” District Judge Sarah B. Wallace said as she agreed to the protective order.

The order prohibits parties in the case from making threatening or intimidating statements. Scott Gessler, a former Colorado secretary of state representing Trump in the case, opposed it. He said a protective order was unnecessary because threats and intimidation already are prohibited by law.

  • @[email protected]
    -10•1 year ago

    Wait what kind of hell hole do we live in where the government can ban people from the ballot of a private club? To be clear to the liberals here, the DNC and the GOP are NOT governmental organizations, and Primary’s have nothing to do with our constitution or voting rights. Plus as was established in 2016, the primary vote itself is 100% optional by the parties involved. They could skip them all together, and just decide to run Trump as their nominee, and there is nothing the Federal Government can do about that. So what the fuck is this case?

    • @[email protected]English
      2•1 year ago

      It hasn’t happened yet, so we don’t know the exact legal justification for why it should or shouldn’t be allowed. This is a lawsuit to remove Trump’s name from the ballots.

      1. Courts have disqualified officials under the Fourteenth Amendment who played far less substantial roles in insurrections, and who, like Trump, did not personally commit violent acts. This includes Couy Griffin, a former New Mexico county commissioner who was a grassroots mobilizer, inciter, and member of Trump’s mob on January 6th (but did not commit violent acts or breach the Capitol building), and Kenneth Worthy, who served as a sheriff in a Confederate state (but did not take up arms in the Confederate army).7 If these individuals’ conduct warranted Section 3 disqualification, then surely Trump’s does as well.
      1. Since January 6, 2021, Trump has publicly affirmed his disloyalty to the Constitution and his allegiance to the insurrectionists who seized the Capitol for him. He has called the insurrectionists “patriots,”8 vowed to give many “full pardons with an apology” if he becomes President again,9 financially supported them,10 released a song with a choir of convicted January 6th defendants called “Justice for All,”11 and hugged on camera a convicted January 6th defendant who has said that Pence and Members of Congress who voted to certify Biden’s victory should be executed for treason.12

      Without going through the whole legal document, there seems to be a fairly good reason for why Trump shouldn’t be allowed to run for president, and removing his name from the primary elections would be one step towards that.