Former US President Donald Trump (2017-2021) presented this Monday his last possible reply brief, before the Supreme Court studies on Thursday, whether the state of Colorado can keep him off the ballots in the previous electoral process. to the November elections.
In the text, his lawyers compared his possible disqualification with that of the opposition candidate María Corina Machado in Venezuela because, according to them, the plaintiffs seek to impose “that same antidemocratic measure” against Trump.
“At a time when the United States threatens sanctions against the socialist dictatorship in Venezuela for excluding the main opposition candidate for the presidency from voting,” highlighted the lawyers, who defined Trump as “the main candidate for the presidency.” of the United States.
The US High Court is scheduled to hold a hearing on Thursday to determine whether the 14th Amendment to the Constitution disqualifies the former president from participating in the Colorado Republican primaries after being accused of leading an “insurrection” during what is known as the ‘assault on the Capitol‘. in January 2021.
A group of voters in that state allege that their participation amounts to insurrection, that the Constitution would prevent them from holding office, and that they should not appear as a candidate on the ballot.
On December 19 of last year, in a ruling unprecedented in the history of the United States, the Colorado Supreme Court had determined that Trump could not participate in the Republican primaries in that state for his role in said attack.
Later, on December 28, Maine became the second state to disqualify Trump. In this case, the decision was made by the authority in charge of organizing the elections in that constituency, the Secretary of State of Maine, Democrat Shenna Bellows.
#Trumps #lawyers #compare #disqualification #Machado
**Interview with Political Analyst Dr. Susan Mitchell**
**Interviewer:** Thank you for joining us today, Dr. Mitchell. With the recent developments surrounding Donald Trump’s potential disqualification from the Colorado ballot, comparing his situation to that of María Corina Machado in Venezuela raises a significant question about democratic principles. What are your thoughts on this comparison made by Trump’s legal team?
**Dr. Mitchell:** Thank you for having me. The comparison is indeed provocative. It highlights the tension between legal frameworks and political maneuvering. While Trump’s lawyers suggest that disqualifying him would undermine democracy, many would argue that his actions during the Capitol insurrection could warrant such measures knowing the historical context of the 14th Amendment.
**Interviewer:** That’s an interesting point. Do you think the public’s reaction will split along party lines, or will there be a broader concern about what disqualifying a major candidate could mean for democracy in the U.S.?
**Dr. Mitchell:** It’s likely to be a polarized response. However, there is a growing segment of voters who are concerned about the implications of either disqualifying a candidate or allowing someone with such a contentious past to run for office. This situation could provoke a widespread debate about the very nature of accountability in democratic processes.
**Interviewer:** Given the examples of political disqualification globally, do you believe that the U.S. should have a firmer stance on such matters? Or should there be more leniency to ensure broad participation?
**Dr. Mitchell:** That is the crux of the debate—how do we balance accountability and participation? A firmer stance might protect democratic integrity, but it could also serve as a precedent that political opponents might exploit in the future. On the other hand, leniency could risk normalizing behavior that threatens the foundations of democracy.
**Interviewer:** This raises a broader question for our readers: Should a candidate’s past actions, especially those related to insurrection, disqualify them from running for office, or should all candidates be allowed to compete, regardless of their history? We look forward to hearing everyone’s thoughts on this contentious issue. Thank you, Dr. Mitchell, for shedding light on this complex situation.
**Dr. Mitchell:** Thank you, it was a pleasure discussing these critical issues.
