{"id":425,"date":"2024-10-23T11:01:47","date_gmt":"2024-10-23T11:01:47","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/macroron.com\/?p=425"},"modified":"2024-11-03T23:12:27","modified_gmt":"2024-11-03T23:12:27","slug":"endorsement-do-not-retain-votes-on-colorado-judges-could-inadvertently-give-a-win-to-trump-supporters","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/macroron.com\/index.php\/2024\/10\/23\/endorsement-do-not-retain-votes-on-colorado-judges-could-inadvertently-give-a-win-to-trump-supporters\/","title":{"rendered":"Endorsement: \u201cDo not retain\u201d votes on Colorado judges could inadvertently give a win to Trump supporters"},"content":{"rendered":"

Angry messages started rolling into the Colorado Supreme Court in December after a majority of judges ruled that President Donald Trump was not eligible to appear on the Colorado primary ballot because he had \u201cengaged in\u201d insurrection. Soon the FBI was investigating<\/a> threats of violence because some Trump supporters had taken their legal disagreement with the court too far.<\/p>\n

Now, Colorado’s Supreme Court Chief Justice Monica M. M\u00e1rquez is being targeted again, this time by groups urging Colorado voters not to retain her on the bench in November’s election. M\u00e1rquez, who grew up in Grand Junction and was appointed by Gov. Bill Ritter to the Supreme Court in 2010, is the only Supreme Court judge on the ballot this fall who joined the majority opinion in Anderson v. Griswold<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Coloradans should vote to retain M\u00e1rquez and send a message to those wielding her retention as a political cudgel that far-right extremists cannot bully Colorado justices. <\/p>\n

RELATED:<\/strong> How to handle questions about judges on the Colorado ballot and make informed votes<\/a><\/div>\n

The four justices were sound in their finding last year that Trump had orchestrated a vast insurrection attempt that culminated with the violent Jan. 6 attempt to prevent Congress from seating Joe Biden as president.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe are mindful of the magnitude and weight of the questions now before us,\u201d wrote the four-justice majority late last year. \u201cWe are likewise mindful of our solemn duty to apply the law, without fear or favor, and without being swayed by public reaction to the decisions that the law mandates we reach.\u201d<\/p>\n

In other words, the justices stood strong against threats and angry messages flooding into the courts. The majority applied the clear language of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, a guarantee that Americans not be governed by someone who had betrayed the cornerstone of American democracy by treason or insurrection. The facts of the case had been litigated in a lower court that also found Trump had engaged in insurrection.<\/p>\n

A national social issue non-profit called the Article III Project launched a campaign not to retain M\u00e1rquez.<\/p>\n

“Monica M\u00e1rquez attempted to disenfranchise over 550,000 Colorado Trump primary voters,\u201d Mike Davis, founder and president of the nonprofit group, told The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel<\/a> earlier this month. \u201cShe doesn\u2019t respect democracy and the rule of law. So it\u2019s time for Colorado voters to fire Monica M\u00e1rquez in this November 5th election.\u201d<\/p>\n

This is utter nonsense.<\/p>\n

The U.S. Supreme Court did strike down their decision with a unanimous ruling that states could not enforce the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution on their own. But, this ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court was based entirely on their interpretation of Section 5 of the 14th Amendment, giving Congress the power to enforce the post-Civil War amendment. The justices lamented the “chaos” that would come if states were able to enforce the insurrection clause of the 14th Amendment without a federal process spelled out in legislation for doing so. Perhaps, if the U.S. Supreme Court had more courage, they would have been less worried about “chaos” and more worried with enforcing the U.S. Constitution faithfully.<\/p>\n

In other words, Colorado\u2019s justices did what the nation\u2019s top justices were too afraid to do \u2013 stand up for the amendment as written, no matter the difficulty that could ensue if enforced by a state-court.<\/p>\n