Huge Win: Judge Agrees With ACLJ Brief Representing 7 State Republican Parties Throwing Out Trump Ballot Ban Lawsuit

By 

Jordan Sekulow

|
November 15, 2023

4 min read

Election Law

A

A

For the second time in just the last few days, a state judge has thrown out a lawsuit attempting to ban President Trump from the ballot. This time a Michigan court agreed with the ACLJ’s amicus brief filed on behalf of our client, the Michigan Republican Party, along with six additional state Republican Parties who joined the brief.

As we previously explained:

[I]n Michigan . . . , we filed a major amicus brief representing the Republican Parties of seven states. A lawsuit there, spearheaded by the same organization that led the lawsuit in Minnesota where we helped secure a victory . . . , seeks to likewise disqualify President Trump from the ballot in that crucial battleground state. Four individuals filed a lawsuit in the Michigan Court of Claims (a subset of the Michigan Court of Appeals), trying to disqualify President Trump from the upcoming Michigan primary elections.

We have acted on behalf of the Michigan Republican Party to seek to vindicate that party’s rights by filing an amicus brief. Although our primary client for this amicus brief was the Michigan Republican Party, trying to vindicate its own specific rights to choose its candidates in Michigan, other state Republican parties joined this brief as well, seeking to likewise vindicate their own abilities to choose political candidates. A loss to the Michigan Republican Party is ultimately a loss to any state Republican Party and to the abilities of that state party to choose its candidates. Removing a candidate from the ballot in one state waters down the votes of citizens in other states who are now less likely to have their preferred candidate selected nationally.

Our amicus brief was ultimately filed on behalf of seven Republican Parties: the Michigan Republican Party, the Oklahoma Republican Party, the Colorado Republican Committee, the West Virginia Republican Party, the Kansas Republican Party, the North Dakota Republican Party, and the Delaware Republican Party. The ACLJ represented all of these Republican Parties with an amicus brief that thoroughly demonstrated why the Michigan Court of Claims or the Michigan Secretary of State lacks any jurisdiction to decide presidential constitutional qualifications and why any attempt to do so would be an infringement on the First Amendment rights of the state parties.

The judge agreed:

Michigan Court of Claims Judge James Redford said in his decision Tuesday that questions about Trump’s role in the January 6, 2021, insurrection – and whether it constitutionally bars him from returning to the White House – should be addressed by elected representatives in Congress.

He ruled that the matter was a “political question” that shouldn’t be decided by the judicial branch. . . .

A court disqualifying Trump would’ve taken that decision away from “a body made up of elected representatives of the people of every state in the nation, and gives it to but one single judicial officer, a person who no matter how well intentioned, evenhanded, fair and learned, cannot in any manner or form possibly embody the represented qualities of every citizen of the nation,” Redford wrote.

We have helped secure victories for our clients and members in Oklahoma, Minnesota, and now Michigan, but the fight continues in Colorado (in which our legal team is conducting closing arguments in court today), West Virginia, and Virginia. This battle is sure to intensify, with appeals likely in the coming days. These cases continue to arise in state after state, and the push from the Left to take this unprecedented step seems unrelenting. We are prepared to fight this issue all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States if necessary, but we continue to need your help and support as we seek to do so.