Former President Donald Trump is facing a potentially pivotal court decision, unrelated to his indictments, as he embarks on his third attempt to regain the presidency, as outlined in a recent analysis.
Katherine Fung, in her Newsweek article, underscores the significance of the U.S. Supreme Court’s upcoming determination on whether Trump is still eligible to run for federal office based on a provision within the 14th Amendment, a decision he cannot afford to lose.
During their conference on September 29, the Supreme Court will deliberate on whether to hear the case of John Castro v. Donald Trump. A final decision on whether to accept the case will be made by October 9.
“Castro, a Texas tax attorney, claims that Trump participated in an insurrection against the U.S. government by organizing his rally against certification of the 2020 election on Jan. 6, 2021. He is a declared candidate for the Republican nomination and has previously run for various offices. Castro ran for his first race in 2004 as a Democrat. He is currently running as a write-in candidate,” the outlet 1945 reported.
In June, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, who was appointed by former President Trump and is concurrently presiding over John Castro’s case involving classified documents in Miami, dismissed Castro’s initial lawsuit.
Fung notes:
Castro is arguing that because he and Trump are appealing to the same voters and donors, Trump’s candidacy—which he argues is unconstitutional because of Trump’s involvement in the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot—would cause him “political competitive” injuries.
The disqualification clause in the 14th Amendment blocks individuals from holding public office if they have “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against the United States. Trump has not been charged with insurrection, although he has been indicted in a federal case involving his efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.
She further emphasized that if Trump were disqualified from the ballot in any crucial state, it would significantly diminish his prospects of securing the presidency.
“If SCOTUS [the Supreme Court] rules in my favor, his name cannot appear on the ballot in *any* state because the Constitution’s election clause giving states power over elections only applies to congressional races,” Castro told Newsweek. “It would be a nationwide permanent injunction against all state election officials to keep his name off the ballots and not count any of his write-in votes.”
Castro has filed federal lawsuits in a total of 14 states, including Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, Kansas, Maine, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Utah, West Virginia, and Wyoming. Additionally, he plans to file similar suits in blue states such as Massachusetts, “side-stepping red circuits [and neutralizing] their influence.”
“Unfortunately, it’s all or nothing,” Castro said. “SCOTUS is the only body that can give a final answer as to all 50 states.”
“The decision by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida dismissing Petitioner John Anthony Castro’s civil action on the grounds that he lacks constitutional standing to sue another candidate who is allegedly unqualified to hold public office in the United States pursuant to Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution,” the candidate wrote in his Writ of Certiorari to the nation’s highest court after Cannon tossed his lawsuit over the summer.
