EXCLUSIVE — Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy deserves applause for his actions in trying to preserve the integrity of the nation. Ramaswamy filed an amicus brief on Wednesday to the Supreme Court about the efforts of the Colorado Supreme Court to keep former President Donald Trump from appearing on the ballot. It was a gross overreach of power and a display of judicial activism and partisan politics.
“I am submitting an amicus brief to the Supreme Court arguing for why they need to overturn Colorado’s disastrous decision to try to keep Donald Trump off the ballot because it’s the right thing to do for this country,” Ramaswamy said on a podcast on Wednesday.
Regardless of one’s opinions or feelings about Ramaswamy or Trump, the upstart political newcomer is doing the correct thing here. In the brief, which I obtained Wednesday evening, Ramaswamy makes clear that there was no legitimate legal basis for the move and is indicative of the depths to which Trump’s political opponents will sink to interfere in the election process.
“The conclusion is inescapable: President Trump’s political opponents have sought to disqualify him from the ballot in multiple states because they fear they cannot beat him in a free and fair election,” Ramswamy’s brief reads. “Needless to say, the distress of competing against a formidable opponent cannot justify disqualification under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment. And the consequences of affirming the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision will extend far beyond the dispute over Donald Trump’s eligibility.”
The last sentence is arguably the most important. The decision by the Colorado Supreme Court established a dangerous, radical precedent to weaponize the court on the basis of partisan performative politics.
“Specifically, this Court’s blessing of the lower court’s interpretation of Section 3 will warp incentives for state decision-makers and voters alike,” Ramaswamy’s brief adds. “For secretaries of state and state supreme court justices, the path to national notoriety will be illuminated: To enhance your credibility among co-partisans, simply concoct a reason to declare a disfavored presidential candidate of the opposing party ineligible to run for office.”
“For voters, the message will be equally clear: Scour the records of disfavored candidates for speeches containing martial rhetoric, or even policies that had unintended consequences, and then file challenges under Section 3,” the brief reads. “The number of Section 3 complaints will proliferate, as will the number of divergent outcomes.”
Ramaswamy is correct. The actions taken by the Colorado Supreme Court more resemble the “legal” system of the Moscow trials of Soviet Russia in the 1930s during the Great Purge than the judicial system of the United States. Everyone, especially the group of people who spent the last several years claiming to want to protect the country from “threats to our democracy,” should be concerned and object to the court’s interference. Anyone who believes in the core tenets of the U.S. and wants to ensure the protection of our republic should support Ramaswamy’s actions.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Furthermore, Ramaswamy’s amicus reveals, perhaps unwittingly, the Stalinist nature of Trump’s political opposition, especially those of the Left’s antifa wing and DEI Democrats. Lavrenty Beria, boss of Stalin’s NKVD secret police, putatively said, “Show me the man, and I’ll find you the crime.” The toxicity of today’s radical Left and Trump’s other political opponents have learned their lessons well from their Stalinist ideological ancestors. The realpolitik of the rogue political elite has continued unabated since before Trump left office.
Ramaswamy’s amicus brief is about doing the right thing. Regardless if one loves or hates Ramaswamy or Trump, what the Colorado Supreme Court did was wrong and more action is needed to be taken than just a metaphorical wagging of a finger. The Left’s show-trial attempted purges run counter to the principles of our nation. At least Ramaswamy shows that some Americans still believe in the rule of law.