Conservative Judge Rejects Trump Allies Complaining Over ‘Anti-Democratic’ Ruling Booting Him From Colorado Ballot

Retired former federal judge Michael Luttig countered the claims by Donald Trump’s allies by reminding them of his “anti-Democratic” conduct, now that the former president has been disqualified from the 2024 general election ballot in Colorado.

Luttig made the rounds Wednesday morning to give commentary on the Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling that Trump is ineligible for the presidency because Section Three of the U.S. Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment forbids anyone who “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” to hold office.

On CNN This Morning, Luttig shot down the “misguided” criticism of the ruling from Trump’s allies, calling it “unassailable” and a “straightforward application of the 14th Amendment’s plain terms.”

Luttig sat opposite former Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, who wrote off the complaints about the “anti-democratic” decision by pointing out the Fourteenth Amendment is “a valid provision of the Constitution. It has to remain enforced… and that’s what the judges in the Colorado Supreme Court have done.” Luttig built on this by saying that “It is not the former president’s disqualification that is anti-democratic.”

“The Constitution itself tells us that it is the conduct that gives rise to disqualification under the 14th Amendment that is anti-democratic,” he continued. “We live under the rule of law in this country, and it’s imperative that all Americans accept the decision of our courts, including the Supreme Court of the United States. It is not an option in the United States of America to protest in the streets [the] decisions of our courts, state or federal.”

The Trump campaign has promised to appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court, which Luttig accounted for by saying that that decision “will be a uniform rule nationwide for at least the 2024 election.”

I caveat it that way because it is possible that the Supreme Court would decline to take this case, because this case only disqualifies the former president from a state primary. It would be a legitimate interpretation of the Constitution that the states have the prerogative under the federal Constitution to conduct their primaries as they see fit without federal interference by the United States Constitution or Supreme Court.

Watch above via CNN.