Latest Post

Transitional Improvements: Helping Homeless & Formerly Incarcerated Grocery Store Shooting; 1 Injured, 1 in Custody

Good evening and thank you for joining us tonight. The attempt to ban former President Donald Trump from appearing on Minnesota’s primary ballot has been unsuccessful.

The State Supreme Court rejected the effort, although the decision did not provide the clear outcome that Trump’s attorneys had desired. Here’s Morgan Wolf with more on the ruling and what comes next.

Hello, Randy and Julie. The ruling comes shortly after the Minnesota Supreme Court heard oral arguments on this case. While they dismissed the move to remove former President Trump from the primary ballots, they did leave the possibility open for the case to be refiled for the general election if Trump wins the primary. The Minnesota Supreme Court dismissed a lawsuit that aimed to exclude former President Trump’s name from next year’s GOP primary ballot.

The court clarified that they were not the right authority to address the main question of the lawsuit, which involved a constitutional provision prohibiting those involved in insurrection from holding office. Instead, they cited state law that grants parties the freedom to include any candidate on a primary ballot, a ruling that could set a precedent for other states facing a similar issue. The State Supreme Court explained that they lack the power to intervene in determining who appears on primary ballots because those races are organized by political parties, not the government.

As a result, the court has no jurisdiction over who is eligible for those ballots. Additionally, Professor Tim Johnson from U of M points out that appellate courts in our nation do not address hypothetical matters, and currently, the inclusion of Mr.

Trump in the Minnesota general election ballot remains hypothetical. Trump’s campaign team viewed the decision as further validation of their argument that challenges against his 14th amendment eligibility are unconstitutional strategies aimed at interfering with the election. However, the court did not explicitly declare the argument unconstitutional. Instead, they ruled that the issue should be revisited after the primary if Trump becomes the GOP candidate. For now, the case is effectively closed, but the court will release a more detailed opinion at a later date.

Meanwhile, a similar case in Colorado, which shares similarities with this one, is set to hear closing arguments next week..

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *