John Adoyi
Michigan Supreme Court in the United States has ruled that former President Donald Trump can remain on the Republican Party’s Presidential primaries ballot, rejecting an appeal from an election advocacy group that sought to overturn a lower court’s decision.
The lower court had previously upheld Trump’s inclusion in the primary race, arguing that the matter of his reelection should be left to the U.S. Congress.
Join our WhatsApp ChannelAn election reform advocacy group in the United States, Free Speech For People, alongside other groups and individuals campaigning to prevent the former president from reaching the Whitehouse in 2024, filed lawsuits in various states in the United States on the ground that Donald Trump while trying to remain in office after he lost the 2020 election to Joe Biden, encouraged an insurrection which led to riot at the US capital on January 6, resulting to damages on the building, death and injuries to US citizens.
Holding on to the 14th amendment of the US constitution which states that no person shall hold public office if they have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the Constitution, the group went to court in Michigan which ruled on December 14 to keep the former President on the ballot.
Conversely, the Michigan State appellate court’s December 14 decision declined to address whether Trump had encouraged an insurrection, but ruled that barring him from the primary ballot would be premature.
“At the moment, the only event about to occur is the presidential primary election. But as explained, whether Trump is disqualified is irrelevant to his placement on that particular ballot,” the appellate judges ruled.
Trump’s eligibility to hold office, the appellate judges decided, was ultimately a question for after the primaries had already been decided. They ruled that even if Trump is eventually disqualified under the 14th Amendment, the state Republican Party should have the right to put his name on the primary ballot now.
“As explained, before Trump’s potential disqualification from holding the office of President could become a relevant concern, he would minimally need to prevail in the primary process,” the appellate judges wrote. “That process has yet to begin, and whether Trump prevails in the primary process or becomes the Republican nominee for president are purely hypothetical questions at present.”
Unsatisfied with the lower court’s ruling, the groups filed an appeal, asking the Michigan Supreme court to weigh in.
READ ALSO: US Capitol Riot: Colorado Supreme Court Disqualifies Trump From 2024 Presidential Race
Despite the appeal, the Michigan Supreme Court stood firm, refusing to entertain any further challenges on the matter.
The Supreme Court justices said in their Wednesday decision that they were “not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this court.”
Interestingly, this decision stands in stark contrast to the recent ruling by the Colorado Supreme Court, which barred the former President from participating in the state’s Republican Party presidential primaries. The Colorado court’s decision has sent shockwaves across the country, sparking debates about the role of state courts in determining a candidate’s eligibility for a national office.
The divergent rulings from Michigan and Colorado are now setting a precedent for similar cases in other states where Trump is fighting to secure his name on the nomination ballot. As the 2024 election season gains momentum, the legal battles surrounding Trump’s candidacy are likely to intensify, with each state court decision carrying significant implications for the broader political landscape.
READ ALSO: US 2024: Lists Of Other States Where Trump’s Presidency Has Faced Legal Battle
Meanwhile, in states of Alaska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, South Carolina, Texas, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming, Vermont and Virginia, cases are still pending.
