While we await oral argument in Trump v. Anderson — the Supreme Court case that will evaluate the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision to exclude the former president from the state’s Republican primary ballot — it’s worth revisiting the arguments leveled against the Colorado court’s decision and, by extension, its interpretation of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The first and most important one is that the plot to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, culminating in the Jan. 6 attack on the United States Capitol, was not an insurrection. Related to this is the argument that, even if Jan. 6 was an insurrection, it’s still not clear that Donald Trump was an insurrectionist. If that isn’t persuasive, consider the evidence marshaled by the legal scholars Akhil Reed Amar and Vikram David Amar in a more recent amicus brief. They argue that top of mind for the drafters of the 14th Amendment were the actions of John B. Floyd, the secretary of war during the secession crisis of November 1860 to March 1861.

---

Persons: Anderson —, it’s, Donald Trump, Jonathan Chait, Trump, ” I’ve, Akhil Reed Amar, Vikram David Amar, John B, Floyd, Abraham Lincoln, “, Virginia slaveholder, ” Amar, Amar, Ulysses S, Grant, James Buchanan Organizations: Colorado Supreme, Republican, Colorado, U.S, U.S . Constitution, United States Capitol, Capitol, Colorado Supreme Court Locations: Trump, Colorado, U.S ., New York, Northern, Sumter, South Carolina