OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.
A federal judge has become the latest jurist to rule on an attempt to kick Donald Trump off the 2024 presidential ballot, and it’s not good for his political opponents.
U.S. District Judge Irene Berger, an Obama appointee, dismissed a lawsuit aimed at keeping Trump off the ballot in West Virginia. The suit was brought by John Anthony Castro, a Texas attorney and obscure GOP presidential contender, one of dozens he has filed — thus far unsuccessfully — against Trump.
The West Virginia Record reported that Castro invoked Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which disqualifies individuals who have participated in insurrection or rebellion against the government. The section was also cited in the recent ruling by the Colorado Supreme Court, which determined that Trump cannot be included on the state’s ballot.
However, Berger didn’t even consider that claim, ruling instead that the evidence removed “any doubt that Mr. Castro’s purported ‘campaign’ exists as a vehicle for pursuing litigation, not votes.”
“The plaintiff alleged that he is a candidate for the Republican nomination for president and anticipates being on the ballot in West Virginia,” Berger wrote in her decision. “His complaint contains few specific factual allegations related to his candidacy.
“Castro’s complaint relies on supposition and speculation that if Mr. Trump were removed from the ballot, that his voters and contributors would default to other candidates including Mr. Castro,” Berger’s ruling noted further, according to the outlet.
“But he supplies no specifics to support the conclusion that Trump voters would become Castro voters if his suit was successful.”
West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey, whose office intervened to stop the suit, praised the judge’s ruling.
“Any eligible candidate has the right to be on the ballot unless legally disqualified, and we will defend the laws of West Virginia and the right of voters and candidates to the fullest,” he said, per the outlet.
The Colorado Supreme Court, which is made up entirely of justices nominated by Democrats, reached its groundbreaking and contentious ruling on Tuesday. The state’s highest court ruled 4-3 to disqualify Trump.
William W. Hood III, Melissa Hart, Richard L. Gabriel, and Monica Márquez are the four justices who made the decision. Each of these justices, appointed by Democratic governors, has had their background thoroughly investigated in light of the decision.
June 2015 saw the appointment of Yale alum and Penn law school graduate Justice Richard L. Gabriel to Colorado’s highest court. His time in office has not been without controversy. A female law clerk accused him of harassing her in 2021, the Denver Post reports.
The Colorado Supreme Court appointed Justice Melissa Hart, a Harvard Law School alumna, in December 2017. Her appointment came after she had served as a professor at Colorado’s law school. Hart was allegedly involved in a black job applicant’s eventually dismissed discrimination case at the Supreme Court, as reported in The Daily Mail. By passing over Michele Brown for the position of rules attorney, Hart and the other judges were allegedly discriminating against her based on her race and age.
With her historic appointment to the Colorado Supreme Court in 2010, Justice Monica Márquez—an alumna of Stanford University and Yale Law School—became the first Latina and openly homosexual justice in the state. Some have claimed that her political leanings, rather than a consideration of legal merit, influenced her decision on the Trump ballot issue.
Appointed in January 2014 was Justice William W. Hood III, who earned a Juris Doctor degree from UVA. Each Colorado justice involved in the decision to remove Trump’s name from the ballot is a graduate of prestigious East Coast universities, which the Post Millennial wasted no time bringing to light.
