The Supreme Court has settled a dispute between lawyers over who will argue in favor of disqualifying former President Donald Trump from the ballot because of the Constitution’s insurrection clause.
The justices decided both the Colorado secretary of state and a group of voters would have time to make the case.
The attorneys for Colorado’s secretary of state asked for time in oral arguments on Thursday to argue why Mr. Trump should be excluded. Under state law, they would be the ones to remove his name from ballots.
Attorneys for Norma Anderson and other state voters who brought the initial lawsuit said they have the case covered and see no need for the state to cut into their allotted time before the high court.
In the end, the justices gave Colorado’s secretary of state 10 minutes, the voters’ lawyer 30 minutes and Mr. Trump’s team 40 minutes for the oral arguments.
The case tests the 14th Amendment’s insurrection clause, which bars certain officials who “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against the government from holding federal office. The Colorado Supreme Court ruled that the provision applies to Mr. Trump and prohibits him under state law from the primary election ballot next month.
The case has drawn intense interest from politicians and lawyers. More than 75 friend-of-the-court briefs were filed by Wednesday’s deadline.
Those who argue before the justices are usually in the best positions to present the legal questions the high court is trying to settle.
Mr. Trump’s team of attorneys will have time because they are appealing the Colorado Supreme Court ruling.
Colorado Solicitor General Shannon Wells Stevenson, representing Secretary of State Jena Griswold, said her interests differ from those of the voters, though both are trying to block Mr. Trump from the ballot. She said in her filing that Ms. Griswold needs to defend the operations of the state’s law on ballot eligibility.
Given how time-sensitive the dispute is, the high court could rule soon after oral arguments.
A quick decision is not unprecedented. The Supreme Court decided Bush v. Gore in 2000 in just days and issued its opinion the day after hearing oral arguments.
The insurrection clause reads: “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”
The provision was written into the 14th Amendment in 1868 with Civil War rebels in mind. The Colorado Supreme Court ruled 4-3 in December that it also applied to Mr. Trump.
The majority held that Mr. Trump was an officer of the U.S. subject to the provision, that he did engage in an insurrection with his behavior challenging the 2020 election, that his behavior was not protected by the First Amendment, that states can ban candidates from their ballots without an act of Congress, and that the state doesn’t have to wait for a criminal conviction to do so.
To prevail, Mr. Trump has to win on just one of those issues.
The state court justices acknowledged that they were breaking legal ground with the first significant ruling against Mr. Trump on the ballot question.
Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows used the same legal justification to try to remove the former president from ballots. A state court put the move on hold, and Maine’s top court said it would wait for the Supreme Court’s decision in the Colorado case before hearing Ms. Bellows’ appeal.