Former President Donald Trump faced a 14th Amendment case in Colorado recently that could have seen him removed from the state’s ballot. Fox News analyst Sol Wisenberg appeared on “The Ingraham Angle” to discuss the case, stating that the “significant” thing was that the presiding judge “held back.”
Host Laura Ingraham asked Wisenberg if the judge’s opinion was “significant” and, in response, Wisenberg said that although some in the media might have thought otherwise, he did not find it to be “significant.”
“The significant thing in that opinion was that she held back,” Wisenberg said. “She realizes that the historical record is very mixed on this, so she exercised judicial restraint — you can tell it killed her. But what some judge in Colorado thinks about insurrection, I don’t think is going to have any effect on any of the federal cases here.”
The case in Colorado was originally filed by a group called Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), which sought to takeadvantage of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment which bars “officers of the United States” who took a Constitutional oath from holding office if they are found engaging in an “insurrection.”
However, Judge Sarah Wallace denied the motion in a ruling on November 17, seeming to criticize Trump while acknowledging that she was holding back. Trump supporters welcomed the ruling as a sign that judges are resisting a liberal agenda.
“It’s encouraging that judges are starting to see cases against Trump for what they are — thinly-veiled attempts to express liberal displeasure with Trump instead of legitimate legal attempts to oust him from the ballot,” said one supporter, Peter Johnson.
The CREW group was clearly intent on pushing a political agenda instead of a legal argument, and thankfully Judge Wallace saw that and held back. Supporters of the former president take heart in her ruling, which says as much about others’ attempts to weaponize the law as it does about Trump himself.
