Denver, CO

Editorial: Supreme Court justices keep Trump on the Colorado ballot, ignoring judicial restraint and originalism

Published

2 years ago

March 5, 2024

Editorial: Supreme Court justices keep Trump on the Colorado ballot, ignoring judicial restraint and originalism

We are not surprised that three of the justices on the Supreme Court who favor an evolving view of the Constitution would refuse to enforce a little-known provision of the 14th Amendment that has never before been employed during a presidential election.

While we disagree with their conclusion, the justices are right that there is no precedent and that allowing a state to banish a bad actor from the ballot just before the 2024 primary is an extreme action that could violate competing portions of the Constitution requiring that federal officers are responsive to all the people of America through a coordinated election process.

We are dismayed, however, that Supreme Court Justices John Roberts, Neil Gorsuch, Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh, and to a lesser extent Amy Coney Barrett, would so quickly and with so little explanation abandon their literal adherence to the plain words of the Constitution — a legal world-view known as “originalism.”

Not only did the originalists use historical context to decide what the 14th Amendment says, but they also undermined the entire amendment with a sweeping and far-reaching ruling that Coney Barrett criticized.

These justices stripped pregnant women of their rights without even acknowledging that women in states with abortion bans would die of sepsis while waiting for a fetal heart to stop. And yet, the justices spent a few sad paragraphs at the end of their ruling in Trump v. Anderson lamenting the harm that would occur were former President Donald Trump to be kicked off the ballot in Colorado.

“Nothing in the Constitution requires that we endure such chaos — arriving at any time or different times, up to and perhaps beyond the Inauguration,” write all of the conservative justices with the exception of Barrett, who wrote a short separate opinion. These men cry tears for an orderly election but couldn’t spare a moment for pregnant women suffering life-threatening health conditions.

Gorsuch, Alito and Thomas long ago swore it should not matter to good justices what bad outcomes might result from enforcing the Constitution as written, as long as they did not waver from the plain language. Roberts and Kavanaugh have never claimed to be true originalists but do lean in that direction.

Just how clear is the language of the Constitution when it comes to elected officials who have taken an oath of office and then supported a violent uprising against that very sacred document?

Amendment 14 Section 3 could not be clearer: “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath … to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion.”

Given Trump’s violent rhetoric, his aggressive orchestration of alternative electors following his clear loss in 2020 to President Joe Biden, and his subsequent efforts to prevent Congress from certifying the results as required in the Constitution, it is clear that Trump cannot “hold any office … under the United States.”

Rather than enforce this inconvenient truth in the Constitution, the justices have ruled that states cannot be the ones enforcing the 14th Amendment. They go so far as to rule that no one can enforce the 14th Amendment without legislation or other acts of Congress.

“This can hardly come as a surprise,” the majority quips as they shoot down the Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling that Trump’s actions following the November 2020 election have rendered him unqualified for federal office.

Indeed, it is a surprise that states cannot enforce the 14th Amendment.

Who do these justices think brought the case Brown v. Board of Education to their bench in 1954? It was not federal prosecutors, using federal legislation to enforce desegregatoin of schools in the south. It was citizens, children to be specific, seeking “equal protection” under the 14th Amendment. One of the cases went to state courts, others through federal courts, but never did the Supreme Court deny a case because the state’s courts had no authority to enforce the 14th Amendment. In fact, in some states and some small towns, the wait would have been long for an end to segregation in schools if the Supreme Court had required federal action on the issue.

The court ruled in Brown: “Therefore, we hold that the plaintiffs and others similarly situated for whom the actions have been brought are, by reason of the segregation complained of, deprived of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment.”

In a similar fashion, earnest Coloradans who were convinced that Trump’s insurrection attempt disqualified him from office sought redress in Colorado courts to enforce the 14th Amendment. We wrote in November that these Coloradans obviously had standing to bring this case and that the courts were the appropriate place to litigate whether Trump’s actions met the definition of “insurrection.”

The concurring opinion by Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson made this exact argument while they dissented to the court’s reasoning: “Similarly, nothing else in the rest of the Fourteenth Amendment supports the majority’s view. Section 5 gives Congress the ‘power to enforce [the Amendment] by appropriate legislation.’ Remedial legislation of any kind, however, is not required. All the Reconstruction Amendments (including the due process and equal protection guarantees and prohibition of slavery) ‘are self-executing,’ meaning that they do not depend on legislation.”

Sotomayor, Kagan and Jackson are arguing for judicial restraint. This isn’t the first time, nor the last time we fear, that the rogue conservative majority on the court will rule as broadly as they possibly can in pursuit of their desired outcome.

That four justices ruled narrowly against employing a novel legal argument on a state-by-state basis to keep an insurrectionist from running for president is being considered a win by Trump’s supporters.

That five justices ruled that the 14th Amendment cannot be enforced by states without federal legislation is a loss for America, a loss for liberty and yet another sign that this court is spiraling out of control with no leadership, no discipline and a clear uptick in partisanship.

Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

Source link

Click to comment

Denver, CO

Where To Get Chinese Food In And around Denver On Christmas Day – 303 Magazine

Published

5 hours ago

December 23, 2025

Press Room

Where To Get Chinese Food In And around Denver On Christmas Day – 303 Magazine

Chinese food became popular on Christmas Day primarily because Chinese restaurants were among the few businesses open, offering a convenient, affordable, and culturally neutral dining option.

Several excellent Chinese restaurants in the Denver area that will be open on Christmas Day, continuing a holiday tradition. Many of these locations offer both dine-in and takeout options.

We recommend calling ahead to confirm their holiday hours and placing any takeout orders in advance, as availability may change.

We hope this list of our favorite Chinese restaurants is helpful!

Central Denver

Peter’s Chinese Cafe

A local Chinese-American favorite since 1985, famous for its sesame chicken and loyal clientele

Directions: 2609 E 12th Ave

Great Wall Chinese Restaurant

Offering takeout and delivery from 11 a.m. to 10 p.m.
You can order online at cogreatwalltogo.com.

Directions: 440 E Colfax Ave

Pepper Asian Bistro

This spot has locations in City Park and the Lower Highlands, providing a mix of Chinese and Thai options for dine-in or takeout.

Directions: 2831 E Colfax Ave

Chinatown Bistro

A cozy uptown option located at 1789 Ogden St., serving classic dishes like sesame chicken and Mongolian beef with easy takeout/delivery options.

Directions: 1789 Ogden St

Little Ollie’s

Open for dine-in, takeout, and delivery from 3 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. on Christmas Day.
Order online at littleollies.com.

Directions: 2360 E 3rd Ave

South & West Denver/Englewood

Golden Shanghai Restaurant(USHI)

A beloved establishment open from noon to 9 p.m., offering Chinese, Thai, and Vietnamese fare.
Order online at goldenshanghai-denver.com.

Directions: 1412 S Parker Rd

Star Kitchen

A large Chinese fixture known for its dim sum and seafood dishes.

Directions: 2917 W Mississippi

Bistro King Asian Restaurant

This family-owned restaurant in Englewood is open from 11 a.m. to 8 p.m.
Order online via their website bistrokingonline.com.

Directions: 3542 S Fox St

Chopstix Fusion

A highly-praised, small Denver-area restaurant known for authentic Hong Kong-style cuisine, especially clay pots, noodles (like Beef Chow Fun), and incredible house-made Asian desserts.

Directions: 2020 S Parker Rd

Aurora & Nearby Areas

Chef Liu’s Kitchen

Known for its bold Szechuan and Northern Chinese dishes, available for dine-in or takeout.

Directions: 2222 S Havana St

Dillon’s Dumpling House

Open from 11 a.m. to 9:30 p.m. on Christmas Day for takeout, delivery, and dine-in.
Order online at dillonsdumplinghouse.com.

Directions: 3571 S Tower Rd

Nana’s Dim Sum & Dumplings

The Aurora location is open from noon to 9 p.m. for dine-in, takeout, and delivery.
You can order via their website nanasdimsumanddumplings.com.

Directions: 2495 S Havana St

Shanghai Kitchen

Open for takeout, delivery, and dine-in from 11:30 a.m. to 9:15 p.m. on Christmas Day.
Order online at shanghaikitchendenver.com.

Directions: 4940 S Yosemite St

Source link

Denver, CO

Utah Jazz vs Denver Nuggets: Recap and final score

Published

17 hours ago

December 23, 2025

Press Room

Utah Jazz vs Denver Nuggets: Recap and final score

In a game that was over in the first quarter, the Denver Nuggets destroyed the Utah Jazz 135-112. The score isn’t even indicative of how the game went. To start the game, the Nuggets went on a massive run, leaving the Jazz down by 27 points in the middle of the 1st quarter. For the Jazz, it’s surprising just how different they are on the road versus at home. At home, the Jazz are 7-9 while they are 3-9 on the road. This game was a perfect example. The Jazz looked like they got Monstar’d in the first quarter, and there was no way for them to recover the rest of the game. It’s a sign that this Jazz team, as competitive as they’ve mostly been at home, is not there yet as a competitive team.

There were a few things on this one to build on, but some things to be concerned about. Keyonte George was able to calm down after a shaky start and was able to shoot a respectable 7/14 from the field and 2/4 from three. He also grabbed 8 boards and dished out 7 assists. George looked the most in control of anyone on the Jazz during the loss. It’s one of those signs that George is evolving into a great player who will perform at a high level regardless of whatever situation he’s in.

For things to be a little concerned about? Lauri Markkanen continues not shoot the three well. Tonight he was 2/9 from three and is now shooting 35.2%. Overall, Markkanen shot it well from the field at 10/20, but it would be nice if that three-point shot started falling more consistently. It’s the skillset that sets Markkanen apart but it’s not really showing up again this season. Last season, Markkanen ended the year at 34.6%. Is this the reflection of a season being thrown again, or is this just what Markkanen is as a shooter?

Probably the biggest concern of everything is the defense. Yes, you’re playing against Nikola Jokic, but the Jazz came into this one as the #29 defense in the league. So many times in this one, you have defenders playing off shooters and not able to defend shooters. And we’re not talking drive-and-kick-type plays, these are one-pass-away possessions that are getting open threes. It’s not the best sign for this team, ever being a high-level defense. Maybe they’re not trying as hard with the obvious tank that now appears to be happening, but it would be nice to see some better outcomes with the defense on nights like tonight. That said, the best thing for this team, after a game like tonight, is to add more talent to the roster. Fixing the defense is something they’ll worry about more next season. But it’s definitely something to watch as the season goes on, and pay attention to who is able to make an impact defensively.

Source link

Denver, CO

Denver Broncos Week 18 opponent just lost a huge defensive contributor

Published

1 day ago

December 22, 2025

Press Room

Denver Broncos Week 18 opponent just lost a huge defensive contributor

The Denver Broncos saw their 11-game winning streak end thanks to the Jacksonville Jaguars. It was a pretty brutal performance all the way around from Denver, but thanks to that 11-game winning streak, the Broncos were actually able to lose a game – they could afford a loss, if that makes sense.

Even with the Bills, Chargers, and Patriots all winning in Week 16, the 12-3 Broncos are still atop the AFC West and atop the AFC. All Denver has to do is win their final two games, and both things will be clinched. With Denver slowly beginning to battle key injuries, getting that first-round bye could be massive for the health of the team.

With the Kansas City Chiefs likely starting a third-string QB in Week 17, you would like to think that Denver can take care of business and get to 13-3, which could set up a massive showdown with the Los Angeles Chargers for the division title. Well, that game just got a bit more interesting, as a key Chargers’ defensive player was just suspended.

Chargers lose starting linebacker Denzel Perryman to a two-game suspension

Here is the update from Tom Pelissero:

Chargers linebacker Denzel Perryman has been suspended without pay for two games for repeated violations of playing rules intended to protect the health and safety of players, including during Sunday’s game against the Dallas Cowboys.
— Tom Pelissero (@TomPelissero) December 22, 2025

Denzel Perryman is a starting linebacker for the Los Angeles Chargers and was essentially suspended two games for not playing a clean, safe version of football. This obviously means that Perryman is not suiting up for the remainder of the regular season, but will be back in time for the playoffs.

Perryman, 33 years old, is on his second stint with the Chargers and has now played in 10 games this year. In those 1- games, he’s racked up three passes defended, 47 total tackles, and four tackles for loss. Perryman is definitely more of a tone-setter on the defensive side of the ball and not someone who is going to make those hyper-athletic splashy plays that some linebackers can make.

This is huge for the Chargers’ defense, a very good unit thanks to defensive coordinator Jesse Minter, but the personnel on that side of the ball aren’t super talented. The Chargers are one of those teams that honestly benefit more from great coaching than they do having more talent than the opponent.

The Bolts can still win the AFC West, but they would have to win their final two games. Not having Denzel Perryman for a massive Week 18 showdown in Denver is flat-out massive and a huge blow to their defense.

Source link