Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold Criticizes Supreme Court Over Trump Ballot Case
In a recent interview with CNN anchor John Berman, Democratic Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold expressed her disappointment with the Supreme Court’s handling of the Trump v. Anderson case. The case involves a decision by Colorado’s high court to ban former President Trump from the state’s primary ballot. Griswold criticized the Supreme Court, stating that it has not been friendly to democracy in recent years.
“We know this is a court that has not been friendly to democracy, voting rights, and fundamental freedoms. I think, ultimately, this case is really important,” Griswold said. She found it surprising that the justices did not seem to discuss whether Trump committed an “insurrection” on January 6, 2021.
Griswold emphasized the significance of the case and shared her thoughts on the atmosphere in Washington, D.C., where she observed government buildings while the case was ongoing. She recalled the events of January 6th, with Congress members running for their lives and a violent mob attempting to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power. Griswold described being in the Supreme Court and hearing Trump continue to lie about his role in the insurrection as a surreal experience.
When asked about Colorado’s chances of winning the case against Trump, Griswold did not provide a direct answer. However, she highlighted the importance of exploring Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which was designed to address the dangers of having insurrectionists in office and the potential threat they pose to democracy.
Griswold admitted being hesitant to draw conclusions from the oral arguments, despite left-leaning media pundits suggesting that Trump would win the case based on the justices’ questioning. She expressed shock at the justices’ uncertainty about how to define insurrection, stating that the United States Supreme Court has all the necessary tools to do so. Griswold firmly believes that Donald Trump broke the law and incited the violent mob.
The outcome of the Trump v. Anderson case has significant implications for the country’s future. It raises important questions about democracy, voting rights, and the consequences of having insurrectionists in office. Griswold’s criticism of the Supreme Court’s handling of the case reflects her concerns about the court’s stance on these issues.
While the final decision rests with the Supreme Court, it is clear that this case has sparked a heated debate about the role of democracy and the boundaries of political power. As the country awaits the court’s ruling, the implications of this case will undoubtedly shape future discussions about election integrity and the preservation of democratic values.
