OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.
A congressional ally of former President Donald Trump issued a warning to states that remove him from the 2024 ballot that the House will decide whether or not to certify their electors after next year’s election.
“Maine, Colorado, and other states that might try to bureaucratically deny ballot access to any Republican nominee should remember the U.S. House of Representatives is the ultimate arbiter of whether to certify electors from those states,” Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) posted on X Friday.
Elon Musk, owner of X, replied to Massie’s comment, saying, “Interesting.”
Massie’s post comes after the Colorado Supreme Court and Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows removed Trump from their respective state ballots next year citing a constitutional violation that Trump has neither been charged nor convicted of — “insurrection.”
Several legal experts on the left and right have already predicted that the U.S. Supreme Court will eventually overturn both actions, including former federal prosecutor and CNN chief legal analyst Elie Honig.
During a show segment on Friday, Honig ripped Bellows, a former official with the far-left ACLU, accusing her of basing her decision to remove Trump on “YouTube clips, news reports” and other “things that would never pass the bar in normal court.”
CNN anchor John Berman asked Honig, “The 14th Amendment, Section 3 says in plain text that if you shall have engaged in insurrection, you can’t be in office. She takes that to mean that if she determines that Donald Trump engaged in insurrection, he can’t be on the Maine primary ballot. Is it that simple?”
“No, it’s not that simple,” Honig argued. “So, clearly, Section 3 of the 14th Amendment says, ‘Engage in insurrection, you’re out.’ We all have that. The complicated part, and where we are going to see this play out in the courts, is who gets to decide and by what process.”
He also said that it’s “important to note” that Bellows’ ruling “says she’s basically following the same legal reasoning as the Colorado Supreme Court did last week, and she says in her ruling if this gets struck down in Colorado, we’re out of luck too. So she’s basing it on the same legal argument.”
“Let me sort of lay out the arguments on both sides,” he continued. “And by the way, it’s worth saying, we’re all theorizing here. We’re in legally unknown territory. The argument against is, first of all, the 14th Amendment Section 5 says Congress has the authority to pass laws to implement this. They did, they passed the criminal law, and the argument is that means Congress, not the states.”
“But perhaps, and this is the argument that the Maine secretary of state and Colorado made, the states can do it too. If that’s true, then section 2– question two is, were the processes, were the hearings fair? Did they comport with due process?” Honig continued.
“And I think there’s a question there with regard to what Maine did because if you look at the hearing, and she details this in the ruling, they heard from one fact witness, a law professor,” he added. “She based her ruling on a lot of documents, but also YouTube clips, news reports, things that would never pass the bar in normal court.
“She’s not a lawyer, by the way. It’s a smartly written decision, clearly consulted with lawyers, but this is an unelected– she’s chosen by the state legislature. Chosen, elected by the legislature, but not democratically elected,” Honig continued.
Later in the segment, he noted as well: “I do think the Supreme Court is going to take this case. I think tonight’s ruling makes it even more likely.”
He also predicted that the nation’s highest court won’t rule on the question of whether Trump participated in an “insurrection” but strictly on whether states have a right to bar him from the presidential ballot.
