Dozens of amicus briefs were filed in the case of Trump v. Anderson, which questions whether former President Donald Trump is eligible to run for presidency again based on the 14th Amendment’s insurrection clause.
Those supporting Trump’s eligibility included the Republican establishment, former Attorney General Bill Barr, a primary opponent, and legal expert Seth Barrett Tillman.
“We appreciate fully that the Members of this Court would prefer not to be thrust into the midst of a presidential election like this. But there is no avoiding it,” the election attorneys wrote. “Any contention that the time and place for determining Section 3’s applicability is on January 6, 2025, after the election is concluded, invites disaster for the Nation.”
Michigan’s secretary of state and election law experts urged the court to make a final decision.
“As time has passed and new election cycles have begun, some have tried to rewrite the history and significance of the insurrection on January 6,” a brief read. “But any reasonable, good faith consideration of the events surrounding January 6 necessitates the conclusion that Trump encouraged an armed, violent mob to prevent Congress from taking an essential step in the transition of presidential power.”
On the opposing side, former Republican officials and federal judge J. Michael Luttig pushed for Trump’s disqualification, with Capitol police officers also filing a brief against Trump.
“Mr. Trump deliberately tried to break the Constitution — to incite threatened and actual armed force to prevent the peaceful transfer of executive power,” Luttig and the officials wrote. “That constituted engaging in an insurrection against the Constitution.”
The case is set for arguments before the court.
Read Also:
Nikki Haley Admits Why She Feels ‘Stupid’ On Campaign Trail
Hot Mic Slip Exposes MSNBC Host’s True Views On Biden
