California Lieutenant Governor Eleni Kounalakis has recently called for the exploration of legal options to remove former President Donald Trump from California's 2024 primary ballot. In a letter sent to California's secretary of state, Kounalakis cited a recent ruling in Colorado as precedent for disqualifying Trump due to his alleged involvement in the insurrection at the Capitol.
The Colorado case involved anti-Trump groups suing the secretary of state, arguing that Trump should be disqualified based on his role in the insurrection. Kounalakis believes that the decision in Colorado sets an important precedent and that California should examine the facts and make a similar determination.
However, there is a difference in opinion regarding the role of secretaries of state in making such a decision. Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, for example, believes that the eligibility of Trump to run for president again should be a decision for the courts, rather than secretaries of state. Kounalakis, on the other hand, argues that secretaries of state have the responsibility of determining whether individuals meet the qualifications to be placed on the ballot.
The key point of contention revolves around the interpretation of the Constitution's eligibility requirements for presidential candidates. While Kounalakis claims that the Constitution is clear in its disqualification of 'insurrectionists,' opponents argue that the issue of being an insurrectionist is subjective and requires a judicial process for determination.
It is worth noting that the Supreme Court may eventually need to weigh in on this matter. Kounalakis acknowledges that the uncharted territory of Trump's situation necessitates a thorough examination of the facts and adherence to the rule of law. She points out that Trump's alleged involvement in the insurrection and his indictment on four occasions with 91 felony counts are highly unusual circumstances for a former president.
As the case unfolds, the decision by the secretary of state in California will be crucial in determining whether Trump is qualified to be on the primary ballot. While the word 'president' is not explicitly mentioned when discussing the disqualification of an insurrectionist, the Colorado ruling and the unique circumstances surrounding Trump's presidency have sparked debates that may need to be resolved by the courts.
California finds itself in uncharted territory, balancing constitutional interpretation and the unprecedented actions of a former president. As the legal process progresses, the outcome of this issue will have significant implications for the future of California's primary election and potentially impact the broader national discussion on the eligibility of individuals involved in insurrectionist activities.
