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

Report: Broncos expected to ‘make a splash’ at running back

Published

48 minutes ago

March 4, 2026

Press Room

Report: Broncos expected to ‘make a splash’ at running back

The Denver Broncos are in the market for a running back.

Just two days after NFL Network’s Ian Rapoport reported that Denver wants to have the running back position addressed before the draft, Jonathan Jones of CBS Sports reported that the Broncos are “poised to make a splash” at running back during NFL free agency.

“Denver is the reason why the Jets used the franchise tag on Breece Hall rather than the transition tag, according to sources, making sure Denver wouldn’t get the opportunity to put together an offer the Jets would refuse to match,” Jones wrote for CBS Sports.

Jones said the Broncos would be an obvious potential landing spot for Kenneth Walker, and he noted that Travis Etienne could be a cheaper alternative. The Athletic’s Nick Kosmider also reported this week that Denver is expected to “closely examine” the RB market, and he name-dropped Walker, Etienne and Rico Dowdle.

The Broncos also have an in-house free agent at RB in J.K. Dobbins, who has expressed his desire to remain in Denver. The Broncos can begin negotiating with pending free agents from other clubs on March 9, but no deals can become official until the new league year begins on March 11. In-house free agents can be re-signed at any time.

Social: Follow Broncos Wire on Facebook and Twitter/X! Did you know: These 25 celebrities are Broncos fans.

Source link

Denver, CO

Grand Junction, Palisade reach Great Eight in Denver

Published

13 hours ago

March 4, 2026

Press Room

Grand Junction, Palisade reach Great Eight in Denver

GRAND JUNCTION, Colo. (KREX) — The Class 5A Sweet 16 has arrived, and both Grand Junction and Palisade are still standing with trips to the Great Eight in Denver on the line.

At The Jungle, the No. 2 seed Grand Junction Tigers set the tone early against No. 18 Golden. Defense carried the Tigers from the opening tip as they held the Demons to nine first quarter points while scoring 16 of their own.

Grand Junction added eight points in the second quarter while Golden managed six, sending the Tigers into halftime with a nine point lead.

Golden responded in the third quarter, outscoring Grand Junction 16 to 11 to cut the deficit to five entering the fourth. The Tigers answered in the final period, attacking the rim and converting key shots to win the quarter 19 to 10. Grand Junction secured a 54 to 41 victory to protect its home court and advance to the Great Eight in Denver.

Top seeded Palisade also defended its home floor with a trip to Denver at stake. The Bulldogs opened with nine straight points to energize a packed gym, but Frederick settled in and closed the first quarter on a run to tie the game at nine.

Frederick continued to respond in the second quarter and took an eight point lead into halftime.

Palisade shifted momentum after the break. The Bulldogs tightened defensively, holding Frederick to 21 points in the second half while scoring 39 of their own. Palisade completed the comeback to advance to the Great Eight.

Colorado Mesa University Women Deliver Historic RMAC Tournament Win

In collegiate action, the top seeded Colorado Mesa University women’s basketball team defeated Colorado School of Mines 96 to 51 in the RMAC Tournament, marking the largest margin of victory in the tournament this century.

Olivia Reed-Thyne led the Mavericks with 34 points on 11 of 15 shooting, her third 30 point performance this season. Mason Rowland added 22 points and Hallie Clark contributed 10 as Colorado Mesa matched a program record with its 31st win. The Mavericks will host the semifinals Friday with a berth in the championship game at stake.

Colorado Mesa University Men Survive Overtime Thriller

The Colorado Mesa University men’s basketball team faced New Mexico Highlands University for the third time this season. The Mavericks scored 36 first half points and led by four at the break.

New Mexico Highlands shot 50 percent in the second half, received 21 bench points and outscored Colorado Mesa 43 to 39 to force a late push. With the season in the balance, Ty Allred hit a game tying 3 pointer to make it 75 and send the game to overtime. Allred scored seven points in the extra period as Colorado Mesa earned a 91 to 90 victory to advance to the next round.

For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to WesternSlopeNow.com.

Source link

Denver, CO

Former Avs defenseman launches beer brand in Denver

Published

1 day ago

March 3, 2026

Press Room

While most people know beers as “cold ones,” Tyson Barrie opts for a different name.

“We’ve always just called beers chilly ones,” the former Colorado Avalanche defenseman said.

Now, Barrie hopes his moniker goes mainstream with his beer brand Chilly Ones, which made its U.S. debut weeks ago in Colorado. He plans to move to the Centennial State from his home country of Canada come fall to build it out.

So far, the beer is in about 200 businesses across the state, mostly liquor stores like Bonnie Brae and Argonaut, but also eateries such as Oskar Blues.

The light lager is available in cans at 3% alcohol by volume. The less-than-light ABV is popular in Australia and some parts of Europe, he said, but nothing serves that segment in the U.S.

Barrie also said the brand has a nonalcoholic version “in the tanks and ready to go” at Sleeping Giant Brewing Co., the Denver facility where Chilly Ones is made. He said it’s one of the only booze-free options that could “trick” him, and he expects the version to be available by April.

“If you look at all the data that we’re seeing, these two categories – the nonalc and the low – seem to be two of the only ones in the alcohol space that are growing,” Barrie said.

Chilly Ones has been available in Canada since late 2025, and he said a 4.5% to 5% edition is also in the works, though that one won’t hit the shelves for months.

“From what we can see in Canada, people question the 3%. They say it’s not enough,” he said through a grin. “Then in the U.S., people aren’t questioning it at all. They really liked a little bit less and the moderation factor to it.”

That’s why he thinks the low-carb, zero sugar, under 100 calorie drink is a perfect fit for Denver. With the city’s storied history in craft beer combined with a more conscious, active lifestyle, it’s the perfect stateside launching point for his brand, Barrie believes.

Drafted by the Avs and playing in the city from 2011 through 2019, his preexisting connections also were a selling point.

“Every occasion is a little bit different, whether you’re parenting or you’re at a concert or you’ve got to get up early or you’re having two after work and you want to drive,” he said, explaining why there will be multiple versions of the drink available.

“It’s pick your own adventure. We’re not going to judge you,” he continued. “If you want to celebrate and get absolutely hammered, we’ll give you that option too. It’s just you can do it a little bit healthier.”

The idea came to Barrie when he had “a dozen” or so chilly ones during a night with friends years ago. In his phone’s notes app, he wrote that he would one day start a beverage brand with his NHL buddies and call it his colloquial name for beer.

He was still playing in the league at the point, but in 2024, two years after, somebody from the beverage world “very serendipitously” reached out to see if Barrie would be interested in starting a wine or whiskey company.

“And I was like, ‘Yeah, I’d do a beer,’” he recalled.

He was still in the NHL playing with the Nashville Predators but nearing the end of his career. The now-34-year-old gathered several of his fellow skaters, including Avs star Nathan MacKinnon, and other career connections like Lumineers frontman Wesley Schultz, and Chilly Ones was born.

Having that post-playing career journey already laid out has been challenging but worth it, he said.

“I have a lot of friends who have retired, and you struggle with a bit of purpose and you wake up and you’re just kind of looking around, not sure what to do with yourself,” he said. “So I feel grateful. I didn’t even have any time to reset. I was just kind of thrown in the fire.”

Barrie and Chilly Ones raised an undisclosed amount from friends and family to start the brand and are in the midst of a more institutional round.

He and Chilly Ones have no plans to venture outside the state in the short-term. He said he, Chief Operating Officer Kimberley Kainth and CEO Matthew Clayton want to test the market for all three options and get feedback before expanding elsewhere.

Longmont-based Oskar Blues founder Dale Katechis is an adviser, along with White Claw and Mike’s Hard Lemonade alum Todd Anderson.

“We have a team that we really, really trust who has scaled and built products in Colorado and moved out,” Barrie said. “We want to get our feet under us in Colorado and then we’ll start to really look at who’s next.”

Read more from our partner, BusinessDen.

Get more business news by signing up for our Economy Now newsletter.

Source link