What has Michigan Supreme Court said about 'insurrectionist ban’ that attempted to keep Trump out of 2024 primary ballot
Michigan Supreme Court has dismissed a bid to exclude ex-President Donald Trump from the 2024 primary ballot, citing the US Constitution's «insurrectionist ban.»
The anticipated outcome stands as a win for the former president, with the possibility of a renewed attempt for the general election. In contrast, the recent decision by the Colorado Supreme Court removed Trump from its primary ballot due to his involvement in the January 6 Capitol riot, but this ruling is currently on hold pending an appeal.
Given these conflicting rulings, the anticipated appeals to the US Supreme Court gain heightened significance, particularly as the country approaches the start of the 2024 primaries.
In contrast to Colorado, the Michigan lawsuit didn't proceed to a trial and was dismissed early in the proceedings. An intermediate appeals court affirmed the decision to dismiss the case based on procedural grounds.
The first judge from the Michigan Court of Claims asserted that according to state law, election officials lack the authority to scrutinize the eligibility of presidential primary candidates. Additionally, he deemed the case to pose a political question unfit for judicial resolution.
This ruling was affirmed by the Michigan Court of Appeals, stating that, «Currently, the imminent event is the presidential primary election. However, whether Trump is disqualified is inconsequential to his inclusion on that specific ballot.»
The Michigan Supreme Court issued an unsigned order without disclosing the vote count.
In contrast to Colorado, the Michigan courts dismissed the case solely based on procedural issues. They did not address the inquiries of whether January 6
