U.S. Supreme Court: Let Voters Vote 

In December, the Colorado Supreme Court decided that former President Donald Trump didn’t qualify for the ballot in 2024 because he incited the “insurrection” on January 6, 2021, in violation of the 14th Amendment, Section 3. It was a horrific act of judicial reach. In the 4-3 ruling—with all seven of the justices appointed by Democrats—the court narrowly decided that it was able to shift a national election.

On Monday, the Supreme Court of the U.S. reversed the Anderson vs. Colorado case unanimously. The three justices nominated by Democrat presidents—Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson—concurred with the six GOP-chosen justices that having elections with a “patchwork” of states imposing their own new rules could lead to “chaos.” 

The Colorado approach to elections, “could nullify the votes of millions and change the election result,” opined the court.

The Colorado scheme, if it wasn’t halted, would have banned any write-in votes cast for Donald Trump, said the full table.

If the tables weren’t turned, it can be imagined how mainstream media would be covering it.

Decision no surprise

The decision should not be a surprise. During February’s oral arguments, Kagan said, “I think the question that you have to confront is why a single state should decide who gets to be president of the United States.”

Jena Griswold, Colorado Secretary of State, posted on X, “I am disappointed in the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision stripping states of the authority to enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment for federal candidates. Colorado should be able to bar oath-breaking insurrections from our ballot.”

Colorado and voters — like voters in all states — should be able to vote for their candidate(s) of choice — and have their votes counted. 

Chief Justice John Roberts has brought a sense of civility and community to the nation’s top court.

In her concurring report, Justice Amy Coney Barrett said that, given today’s “politically charged” atmosphere, the high court should “not amplify disagreement with stridency” and “should turn the national temperature down, not up.”

Laurence Tribe, professor emeritus and Harvard Law professor, didn’t tone the memo down.

After the 9-0 decision, Tribe dismissed it as “allowing voters to get basically snookered into giving” it to a man who is grasping to hang on to power after ‘losing’ the 2020 election.

Snookered? I think not. Voters should be allowed to vote for whomever they choose.