## Facts

- Colorado voters petitioned under state election law to exclude Donald J. Trump from Colorado’s 2024 Republican presidential primary ballot, alleging he was disqualified by Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment for “engag[ing] in insurrection” related to January 6, 2021.
- A Colorado trial court found clear and convincing evidence that Trump engaged in insurrection as used in Section 3, but ruled Section 3 did not apply to the presidency and denied relief.
- The Colorado Supreme Court held Section 3 applies to the presidency, concluded Trump was disqualified, and ordered the Secretary of State not to list him on the primary ballot and to disregard write-in votes; it stayed its ruling pending review.
- The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari on an expedited basis and reversed.
- The U.S. Supreme Court did not decide whether Trump engaged in insurrection or whether Section 3 applies to the presidency; it resolved the case on enforcement authority.

## Issues

1. Whether a state may determine and enforce ineligibility for federal office under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment by excluding a presidential candidate from a state primary ballot.
2. Whether enforcement of Section 3 against federal officeholders and candidates is assigned to Congress rather than the states.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court unanimously reversed the Colorado Supreme Court’s judgment.
- The Court held that the Constitution makes Congress, not the states, responsible for enforcing Section 3 against federal officeholders and candidates.
- Colorado therefore lacked authority to exclude Trump from the presidential primary ballot on Section 3 grounds.
- Separate writings agreed with the judgment but differed on how broadly to describe Section 3’s enforcement limits and the need for congressional legislation.

## Legal Principles

- States may not enforce Fourteenth Amendment Section 3 to disqualify candidates for federal office; enforcement responsibility lies with Congress.
- Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment assigns Congress authority to enforce the Amendment through appropriate legislation, supporting congressional primacy for Section 3 enforcement as to federal offices.
- Allowing state-by-state Section 3 determinations for federal candidates risks nonuniform outcomes in national elections and conflicts with the national character of federal offices, including the presidency.
- States retain authority to administer their own elections and may apply Section 3 with respect to state offices, but not to determine qualifications for federal offices absent congressional authorization.

## Conclusion

The Court set aside Colorado’s effort to exclude a presidential candidate under Section 3, holding that states lack authority to enforce Section 3 against federal officeholders and candidates and that any such enforcement must come through Congress rather than state courts or state election officials.


Trump v. Anderson, 601 U.S. 100 (2024)