‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌
[link removed] [[link removed]] John,

Five months ago, CREW took on the biggest fight of our 20 year history when we sued in Colorado to remove Donald Trump from the ballot under the 14th Amendment.

In just five months, we managed to score some massive victories. For the first time, a judge ruled that Trump incited insurrection. And then, the Colorado Supreme Court barred him from the ballot for just that.

One thing that news stories have often missed about these ballot eligibility challenges is that Trump was disqualified for insurrection in the *only* two states that heard evidence and decided the cases on the merits.

That means that where courts have considered whether Trump incited insurrection—they’ve unanimously decided that he did. That’s thanks in large part to CREW’s work, and your support.

DONATE → [[link removed]]

Every case that failed to bar Trump from the ballot did so either because the plaintiff lacked standing to bring a challenge or on state law grounds regarding whether a specific state’s law allows for a challenge during the presidential primary.

I wanted to email about this today because I think it’s instructive as we wait to hear from the U.S. Supreme Court on Trump’s ballot eligibility.

Once courts start actually looking at Trump’s conduct and whether it is disqualifying under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, it’s impossible to ignore the reality: Trump is an insurrectionist, he swore an oath to support the Constitution and he is therefore ineligible to appear on the ballot. (Read our explainer of the status of different cases here.) [[link removed]]

While it’s impossible to know what the Supreme Court will do solely based on the questions they asked, it’s notable that the arguments last Thursday focused on legal technicalities, such as whether the president is an “officer of the United states” and whether Section 3 bars insurrectionists from the ballot or just from holding office–not whether January 6th was an insurrection or whether Trump caused it.

We can’t predict what the decision will be or when it will come down. But we must continue to make clear that the stakes here are high.

This case is not about legal technicalities. It is about the future of our democracy.

Thank you for being a part of it,

Adam Rappaport
General Counsel
CREW

DONATE → [[link removed]]
Make sure this email goes to your inbox. Add [email protected] to your address book.
Email is a key way for us to stay in touch and make sure you get the latest updates from our campaign. But if you would like to unsubscribe, click here [[link removed]] .
If you'd like to donate to support our efforts, please click here → [[link removed]]
© Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington 2020–2023
CFC 42218
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
PO Box 14596
Washington, DC 20044
United States