The Supreme Court has rejected an appeal by a former New Mexico county commissioner banished from public office for participating in the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection.

The Supreme Court on Monday rejected an appeal from a former New Mexico county commissioner who was kicked out of office over his participation in the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.

Former Otero County commissioner Couy Griffin, a cowboy pastor who rode to national political fame by embracing then-President Donald Trump with a series of horseback caravans, is the only elected official thus far to be banned from office in connection with the Capitol attack, which disrupted Congress as it was trying to certify Joe Biden’s 2020 electoral victory over Trump.

At a 2022 trial in state district court, Griffin received the first disqualification from office in over a century under a provision of the 14th Amendment written to prevent former Confederates from serving in government after the Civil War.

Though the Supreme Court ruled this month that states don’t have the ability to bar Trump or other candidates for federal offices from the ballot, the justices said different rules apply to state and local candidates.

  • CapgrasDelusion
    9•9 months ago

    Something I’m not sure is talked about enough that is a consequence of that decision is they also removed enforcement of the 14th from the judicial branch, for no reason. The question was narrow: “Can States do this?” The ruling was: “No, they can’t, only Congress.” A better ruling (barring, “yes they can”) would have been: “No, they can’t.” Which would leave room for a convicted insurrectionist to be barred by the courts by said conviction.

    Based on the actual decision Trump could lose the insurrection trial in DC and still be President because the Supreme Court just removed their ability to say otherwise. For no reason other than to protect Trump as far as I can tell. They’re not so stupid they’d remove power on accident, not to mention the more liberal justices and Barrett point this problem out explicitly in their concurrence.

    All of this is moot because none of these federal cases will be decided by the election. The SCOTUS taking up Trump’s obnoxious immunity argument instead of saying the appeals court got it right already guaranteed that.

    • @grueEnglish
      2•9 months ago

      not to mention the more liberal justices and Barrett point this problem out explicitly in their concurrence.

      Frankly, the fact that the liberal justices wrote a concurrence rather than a dissent is the most disgraceful part of all (except for all the other parts, including the fact that justices can be categorized into “liberal” and “conservative” in the first place).