Witnesses concluded their testimony on Friday in the high-stakes trial concerning the disqualification of former President Donald Trump under the 14th Amendment. The trial, held in Colorado, delved into the history of the amendment’s “insurrectionist ban,” heard from US Capitol Police officers who were injured during the January 6, 2021, riot, and included testimony from Trump rally organizers, House lawmakers, and an expert on right-wing extremism. Closing arguments are scheduled for November 15, with a ruling expected shortly thereafter. The 14th Amendment prohibits US officials who participated in insurrection from holding future office, but the enforcement of this ban remains unclear. The trial is seen as a long shot by many experts due to limited precedent and the complex legal questions it raises.
The next steps in the trial involve Denver District Judge Sarah Wallace, appointed by Colorado’s Democratic governor, who will assess the arguments and issue a ruling. Wallace faces several challenging questions, such as whether the events on January 6 qualify as an insurrection and whether Trump’s actions can be considered “engaging” in an insurrection. Additionally, Wallace must determine if the insurrectionist ban applies to presidents and whether she has the authority to enforce the provision or if Congress needs to take action. Throughout the week, Judge Wallace remained impartial and overruled objections from Trump’s lawyers. She also challenged a legal scholar, emphasizing the court’s responsibility to interpret the Constitution rather than relying on Congress.
Regardless of the outcome, an appeal is expected. The trial is being conducted under a special state law that allows for expedited proceedings, meaning any appeals will be directed to the Colorado Supreme Court, consisting of seven Democratic-appointed justices. If necessary, the case can be further appealed to the US Supreme Court, which has a conservative majority due to three justices appointed by Trump.
Legal experts point out that Judge Wallace faces numerous complex issues in a short period of time and predict that the decision could go either way. The plaintiffs, who aim to prevent Trump from running for office in the future, benefit from the court’s willingness to consider evidence and reject Trump’s attempts to dismiss the case. The trial in Denver sheds light on the upcoming federal election subversion trial against Trump, scheduled for March, where federal prosecutors may use similar tactics involving testimonies from police officers and lawmakers to demonstrate how Trump obstructed the certification of the 2020 election results.
Furthermore, Trump’s defense team in Colorado relied heavily on revisionism regarding the events of January 6 and presented testimonies from individuals who continue to claim that the election was stolen. These witnesses aim to dispute the argument that January 6 constituted an insurrection, a term that is not clearly defined in the 14th Amendment. Rally organizer Amy Kremer, for example, testified that the crowd was filled with “patriotic, freedom-loving citizens” who remained peaceful even after Trump’s speech. However, testimonies from police officers wounded in the riot contradict this narrative, highlighting the violence that occurred.
The trial also witnessed the testimony of Tom Bjorklund, a Colorado GOP treasurer who admitted to breaching Capitol grounds but denied engaging in violence. Bjorklund argued that the events of January 6 did not rise to the level of an insurrection. Other figures, such as former Pentagon official Kash Patel and Rep. Ken Buck, questioned the credibility of the January 6 House committee and its composition, arguing that it was biased against Trump.
In order to access more CNN news and newsletters, readers can create an account on CNN.com.
