Former law professor and governor of Montana discuss Trump’s candidacy

Montana – The former president shouldn’t be on Colorado’s ballot, according to a friend of the court brief filed by three former Republican governors.

Former President Donald Trump ought to be on the ballot, according to a former law professor at the University of Montana, and voters will ultimately decide.

The matter that was last heard in the Colorado Supreme Court is currently being examined by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Mark Racicot has been out of government in Montana for 23 years, but he is back in the political spotlight. He filed an amicus brief in the US Supreme Court with two other former governors from the 1990s. Racicot was also the chair of the Republican National Committee.

Racicot submitted the brief to the US Supreme Court on Tuesday, joined by former governors of Massachusetts and New Jersey, Christine Todd Whitman, and William Weld.

Racicot thinks that on January 6, 2021, Trump incited a rebellion at the US Capitol.

“The 14th amendment which is very plain on its face, says that if you have taken an oath and sworn to defend the Constitution and while in office thereafter betray that oath by engaging in an insurrection, then you are ineligible to run for that office again,” Racicot said.

Justices are debating whether Colorado can bar Trump from running for office following the state Supreme Court’s decision last month that Trump was ineligible due to his conduct before January 6.

The governors point to the Constitution’s 14th Amendment, which declares that anybody who has “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the U.S.” is unable to hold federal office.

“The constitution’s very plain,” said Racicot. “It’s very clear.”

However, not everybody concurs with the outgoing governor.

Chief of the Constitutional Studies Center at the Independence Institute in Colorado, Rob Natelson is a constitutional expert and former law professor at the University of Montana.

“I will confess that I haven’t always been a great fan of President Trump,” Natelson said. “But like every American, he’s entitled to due process.”

Natelson also cites the 14th Amendment, which states “nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law.”

“He was not given due process in the first impeachment trial,” Natelson said. “He was not given due process in the second impeachment trial, and he was certainly not given due process by the Jan. 6 committee.”

“Every aspect of due process, namely being able to be heard, and to hear the evidence against you, and to prove to the contrary, has been offered to the former president,” said Racicot.

Natelson contends that the events of January 6 are not specifically mentioned in the Constitution, but rather events like the American Revolution and Shay’s Rebellion.

“They are talking about actually leading the forces or participating in the forces to overturn the government,” Natelson said. “They’re not talking about a speech, such as President Trump gave in which he urged his followers to peacefully and patriotically proceed to the Capitol.”

Regarding the term office, which Racicot claims includes the president, the two are likewise at odds.

According to Natelson, a Supreme Court justice stated that the President was not an officer of the United States at the time the 14th Amendment was ratified.

“The people who, who drafted and ratified the 14th amendment were very familiar with that treatise,” Natelson said. “And so that’s a bit of evidence suggesting that the presidency is not an office that can be disqualified under the 14th amendment. “

“He’s the supreme officer because he’s the chief executive of our government under our constitution,” Racicot said. “So there’s no realistic or credible allegation or discussion about whether or not he’s an officer.”

The US Supreme Court will now have to make the final decision on when this contentious argument ends.

“He cannot pass the qualifications,” Racicot said about Trump. “So he cannot be granted access to the ballot. And if he’s not on the ballot, he can’t be voted for.”

“When the people all like somebody’s president, if there’s a charge of insurrection against that person, the people have heard the charge and made their decision,” Natelson said. “And the people are the highest political authority.”