Minnesota court tosses ‘insurrection’ lawsuit to keep Trump from primary
Court left possibility of federal challenge open
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The Minnesota Supreme Court has dismissed a lawsuit seeking to bar former president Donald Trump from the state’s 2024 presidential primary ballot.
The challenge, from a bipartisan group of state voters, sought to block Mr Trump’s campaign under a 14th Amendment provision forbidding candidates who “engaged in insurrection.”
The state appellate court held in a brief ruling on Wednesday that the Civil War-era measure did not apply to the Minnesota primary process, which it argued was a fundamentally local process outside the purview of the US Constitution.
“There is no state statute that prohibits a major political party from placing on the presidential nomination primary ballot, or sending delegates to the national convention supporting, a candidate who is ineligible to hold office,” the ruling reads.
The court left open the possibility that the voters could challenge Donald Trump’s inclusion on the general election ballot in 2024.
The Trump campaign, in a statement to The Independent, said the ruling is “further validation of the Trump Campaign’s consistent argument that the 14th Amendment ballot challenges are nothing more than strategic, un-Constitutional attempts to interfere with the election by desperate Democrats who see the writing on the wall: President Trump is dominating the polls and has never been in a stronger position to end the failed Biden presidency next November.”
A similar state lawsuit is pending in Colorado, with closing arguments scheduled for next week, and another such legal action was recently thrown out of New Hampshire federal court.
The decisions are likely to be appealed to the US Supreme Court.
The high court has never ruled on the application of the “insurrection” clause, which was put in place in 1868 following the Civil War.
In the Minnesota suit, Donald Trump’s legal team argued that the January 6 insurrection didn’t rise to the level referred to in the Constitution and that Congress has to lay out the meaning of the amendment for it to have force in his case.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments