The Supreme Court ruled Monday that former President Trump should not be disqualified from appearing on state ballots despite allegations that he “participated in an insurrection” after losing the 2020 election and is therefore constitutionally barred from holding office.

The Supreme Court reversed a ruling by Colorado justices saying states do not have the authority to interpret the post-Civil War Fourteenth Amendment or use it to remove a presidential candidate from the state ballot.

It was an unsigned, unanimous decision.

In December, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that Trump was disqualified from running for president because he had violated Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. It says no person “shall hold any office, civil or military” who has taken an oath to support the Constitution and then engages in “insurrection or rebellion” against the United States.

Legal scholars and historians told the court in friend-of-the-court briefs that the Reconstruction Congress sought to prevent “insurgents” from gaining power and undermining American democracy.

The justices did not dispute this reading of history, but seemed more concerned about allowing state judges to remove from the ballot a candidate who is the overwhelming choice of Republican voters.

The court moved with unusual speed to hear Trump’s appeal and rule on his behalf. His lawyers asked the court to review the Colorado case on January 3. Two days later the appeal was granted and arguments were held on February 8.

The justices ruled in Trump’s favor in less than a month and in time for his votes to be counted in Tuesday’s Colorado primary.

T

The court has been slower to move to resolve Trump’s separate claim of presidential immunity from prosecution. As a result, the criminal trial over his role on January 6 may not take place until after the November elections

.

On Dec. On October 1, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan denied Trump’s claim for immunity, ruling that the Constitution does not protect ex-presidents from prosecution for crimes committed while in office. On Dec. On October 11, Special Prosecutor Jack Smith asked the court to grant review and quickly resolve the immunity issue. The case raised a “fundamental question at the heart of our democracy,” he said, and it was “of paramount importance” that it be resolved quickly so that the trial can begin. Without comment, the court dismissed his appeal on December 22. That sent the issue to the D.C. Circuit Court, which heard arguments and rejected Trump’s immunity claim in a 3-0 ruling on Feb. 6. A week later, Trump’s lawyers filed an unusual appeal with the Supreme Court. case stayed indefinitely, but did not request review of the DC Circuit’s decision.

Last week, the court announced that it would hear Trump’s immunity claim.

appeal and review the DC Circuit’s ruling,

preparing arguments for the week of April 22. Under that schedule, the judges are unlikely to rule before June.

By then it may be too late

Right

Chutkan wants to hold the trial before the November elections.

Although the justices appeared well prepared to protect Trump from the insurrection charge in the Colorado case, they were unwilling to take swift action in response to the election calendar to resolve his claim to immunity. In both cases, their scheduling decisions benefit Trump.