West
Supreme Court prepares hearing on Trump removal from Colorado ballot
The U.S. Supreme Court will soon debate whether former President Donald Trump should be removed from Colorado’s primary ballot, the first of what could be several legal challenges by Trump to confront the nine justices.
At issue is whether Trump committed “insurrection” by inciting a crowd to storm the U.S. Capitol Jan. 6, 2021, and whether that would make him constitutionally ineligible to be re-elected president. That, in turn, could block him from appearing on a state primary ballot as a candidate for that office.
Oral arguments are scheduled for Thursday at 10 a.m. ET, and an expedited ruling could come within days or weeks.
The issues have never been tested at the nation’s highest court and are framed as both a constitutional and political fight with enormous stakes for public confidence in the judicial system and the already divisive electoral process.
TRUMP ASKS SUPREME COURT TO KEEP NAME ON COLORADO BALLOT
The U.S. Supreme Court will be listening to oral arguments on whether Trump committed “insurrection” Jan. 6, 2021, and whether that disqualifies him constitutionally from being re-elected president. (Michael M. Santiago)
The wording
The 14th Amendment, Section 3 of the Constitution states, “No person shall… hold any office… under the United States … who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States… to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”
Colorado’s highest court in December ruled that clause covers Trump’s conduct on Jan. 6, 2021, and therefore does apply to a president despite not being explicitly indicated in the text.
“President Trump is disqualified from holding the office of president,” the state court wrote in an unsigned opinion. “Because he is disqualified, it would be a wrongful act under the election code for the secretary to list him as a candidate on the presidential primary ballot.”
SUPREME COURT TO DECIDE IF TRUMP BANNED FROM COLORADO BALLOT IN HISTORIC CASE
The issue could turn on whether the high court interprets “officer of the United States” to apply to a president’s conduct in office.
The arguments
Trump’s legal team in its merits brief said, “The [Supreme] Court should put a swift and decisive end to these ballot-disqualification efforts, which threaten to disenfranchise tens of millions of Americans and which promise to unleash chaos and bedlam if other state courts and state officials follow Colorado’s lead and exclude the likely Republican presidential nominee from their ballots.”
The Constitution treats the presidency separately from other federal officers, Trump’s team argued.
The U.S. Supreme Court is prepping to debate whether Trump should be removed from Colorado’s primary ballot ahead of the 2024 presidential election. (Olivier Douliery/AFP via Getty Images)
“The president swears a different oath set forth in Article II, in which he promises to ‘preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States’ — and in which the word ‘support’ is nowhere to be found,” like it appears in Section 3, Trump’s team wrote.
But lawyers for the Colorado voters challenging Trump’s eligibility said in response, “The thrust of Trump’s position is less legal than it is political. He not-so-subtly threatens ‘bedlam’ if he is not on the ballot. But we already saw the ‘bedlam’ Trump unleashed when he was on the ballot and lost. Section 3 is designed precisely to avoid giving oath-breaking insurrectionists like Trump the power to unleash such mayhem again.
“Nobody, not even a former President, is above the law,” the brief added, comparing Trump to a “mob boss.”
Also at issue:
TRUMP BACKED BY 27 STATES IN SUPREME COURT FIGHT, WHO WARN OF 2024 ‘CHAOS’ IF HE’S REMOVED FROM BALLOT
– Whether state courts or elected state officials can unilaterally enforce constitutional provisions and declare candidates ineligible for federal office — so-called “self-executing” authority — or is that exclusively the jurisdiction of the U.S. Congress. Also, whether Trump can be disqualified without a thorough fact-finding or criminal trial.
– Whether this issue is a purely “political” one that voters should ultimately decide.
– Whether the U.S. Senate’s acquittal at his impeachment trial over Jan. 6 makes him therefore eligible to seek re-election.
– And whether Section 3 prohibits individuals only from “holding” office, not from “seeking or winning” election to office.
The impact
More than a dozen states have pending legal challenges over Trump’s ballot eligibility.
At least 16 state courts and secretaries of state have already concluded his name can appear on the ballot. Colorado and Maine are the only two so far to keep his name off.
Many states have backed the former president, and at least 16 state courts and secretaries of state have allowed his name to appear on the ballot. (Scott Olson/Getty Images)
Other states are saying stay tuned. The Oregon Supreme Court earlier this year dismissed a related lawsuit but told a coalition of voters that, based on what the U.S. Supreme Court decides, they can refile again.
In conducting what are expected to be lengthy and contentious oral arguments, the justices will likely be forced to revisit the events of Jan. 6 and the pivotal speech Trump gave to supporters just before Congress was to certify the Electoral College ballots.
Trump has repeatedly claimed he was not trying to incite violence and that his speech was protected by First Amendment guarantees, especially pertinent as the top federal office holder.
The storming of the U.S. Capitol left 140 law enforcement officers injured, and lawmakers and Vice President Pence fled a mob that breached the building.
The Colorado decision has been on pause pending the U.S. Supreme Court’s final ruling.
MAINE’S TOP COURT WON’T RULE ON TRUMP BALLOT ELIGIBILITY UNTIL SUPREME COURT DECISION IN COLORADO
The state’s 2024 presidential primary ballot with Trump’s name on the Republican ballot has already been certified by the Colorado secretary of state.
But if Trump is ultimately declared ineligible for public office before the state’s March 5 primary, any votes cast in his favor would be nullified.
The Supreme Court has traditionally been reluctant to get involved in overtly political disputes, especially involving elections.
The partisan blowback over the 2000 ruling in Bush v. Gore still resonates, creating the impression among the public that many of the justices harbor partisan political intentions.
“Sometimes the Supreme Court has no choice but to be involved in the election cases because that is an area where, unlike most, the Supreme Court doesn’t even have discretion over whether it takes the case,” said Brianne Gorod, chief counsel at the Constitutional Accountability Center.
“There are some voting rights and election cases that the Supreme Court is required to resolve on the merits.”
Arguments for the Colorado ballot case will be heard Thursday, Feb. 8, at 10 a.m. ET. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin, File)
And beyond …
It is important to note the legal debate over “insurrection” comes to the Supreme Court on a ballot eligibility question.
Special counsel Jack Smith is separately prosecuting Trump for alleged election interference leading up to the Jan. 6 riot, but the former president is not charged specifically with “insurrection” or “rebellion.” The four charges he faces relate to conspiracy and obstruction. Some legal scholars have pointed out Section 3 does not require a criminal conviction to take effect.
The Supreme Court could soon be asked to decide an important component of Smith’s federal case — whether Trump has “absolute immunity” for alleged crimes committed in office.
A federal appeals court is considering the question, and the issue could soon reach the high court on an expedited basis.
Trump’s criminal trial was scheduled for March 4, 2024, but it is likely any Supreme Court consideration of the issues would force a delay, perhaps past the November election.
The former president also faces a state criminal prosecution for alleged election interference in Georgia; a federal criminal prosecution in Florida for alleged mishandling of classified documents that is also led by the special counsel; and a New York state criminal case over allegedly falsifying business records for hush money payments to a porn star.
Pro-Trump protesters rally at the U.S. Capitol in Washington Jan. 6, 2021. Trump faces four charges under special counsel Jack Smith’s prosecution for election interference leading up to the Jan. 6 riot. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana, File)
And there are various civil claims against Trump, from lawsuits: by U.S. Capitol police officers over Jan. 6; alleged fraud involving various Trump-related businesses; and an $83 million defamation judgment stemming from an alleged sexual assault.
It is unclear if any of these cases will eventually reach the U.S. Supreme Court on appeal on the merits. Some may not be considered for years.
In the short term, any further petition with the name “Trump” on the cover could severely strain public confidence in a judicial institution designed to hover above partisan politics.
“I don’t think that the court really follows the political calendar,” said Thomas Dupree, a former top Justice Department attorney in the George W. Bush administration. “I think they’re aware of the fact, obviously, that we’re in an election year, but I don’t think the fact that we’re in an election year is going to be driving the outcomes of any of these decisions.”
The ballot case is Trump v. Anderson (23-719).
Read the full article from Here
San Francisco, CA
Driver Who Raped Woman After She Mistook His Car For An Uber Convicted By Bay Area Jury
SAN FRANCISCO, CA — A man who raped a woman in San Francisco after she got into his car, thinking it was her Uber, has been convicted, prosecutors said.
Jurors convicted Yucel Eryilmaz, 44, of rape of an unconscious person and assault with intent to commit rape, according to the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office.
Prosecutors say a woman and her sister were leaving a club in San Francisco’s Mission District on Oct. 18, 2025, when they accidentally got into Eryilmaz’s car, thinking it was their Uber.
The woman sat in the front seat while her sister sat in the back, where she fell asleep, prosecutors said.
Eryilmaz started driving the women to their destination before he tried to kiss the woman in the front seat, prosecutors said.
The woman refused to kiss him, and when they arrived at the destination, she got out of the car, prosecutors said.
Before she could wake her sleeping sister, Eryilmaz drove off and took her to a parking lot in his apartment complex where he raped her, prosecutors said.
“Video footage shows Mr. Eryilmaz pulling into the parking lot next to his apartment building, exiting the driver’s side door, going to the back of the car, sitting down and locking the door,” prosecutors said. “Three hours later, the victim woke up in the back seat of Mr. Eryilmaz scared and confused, with Mr. Eryilmaz on top of her in the process of a rape.”
Eventually, she was able to free herself from Eryilmaz’s grasp, prosecutors said. She spent about 10 minutes on Eryilmaz’s apartment roof with him and he let her use his phone to call her sister, prosecutors said.
She learned police were looking for her and ran away from Eryilmaz to call for help, prosecutors said.
“I commend the victim for her bravery, authenticity and vulnerability while she relived these terrifying events during her testimony,” Assistant District Attorney Abigail Adams said in a statement. “She showed everyone in the courtroom that there is no ‘correct’ response to rape because trauma affects people differently. I hope the victim finds the closure and healing she needs as she attempts to put this horrific incident behind her.”
A lot of changes could be in store for the Denver Nuggets over the next few months depending on how aggressive this front office wants to be in their offseason moves.
Those moves could even include a trade surrounding Christian Braun––their young wing that they just gave a $125 million extension to less than 12 months ago––yet may be on his way out if there’s a returning package that makes sense for the Nuggets to entertain.
The list of suitors for Braun could be slim. He’ll be making over $20 million next year, coming off a season in which his stock considerably dropped, and might be seen as an added risk to take on for whatever team might be on the receiving end of his services.
However, when surveying the market of those who could decide to take interest later this offseason, the Dallas Mavericks might be a team in search of that two-way presence on the wing next to Cooper Flagg. And if they are indeed interested in a swap, Denver has an ideal package they can try to obtain.
What a Christian Braun-Mavericks Trade Would Look Like
When looking at the Mavericks’ cap sheet and the players they have on the books, only a select few would make sense from Denver’s perspective to pursue, while also being valued comparably to Braun.
One of those top players who could be a strong fit for Denver in a Braun deal is P.J. Washington, who’s on a similarly long contract for the next four seasons, but makes a little less than $20 million for the 2026-27 season–– which tends to help out the Nuggets a bit in their current cap situation.
Here’s a look at what the total trade could look like for both Denver and Dallas if a Washington-for-Braun swap were truly in play:
One important factor to note about the deal is that it’d have to come after the draft takes place later this month. Braun has a poison pill restriction on his extension that lasts until July, and they can’t trade their first round pick until after making the selection due to the Stepien Rule in place.
However, if this trade were to have a bit of traction, it checks a lot of boxes for what the Nuggets would be looking for by swapping out Braun for a more versatile wing defender in Washington.
He’s a bit cheaper, has a better size to place him on the wing as a multi-positional defender, can be a positive floor spacer that fits with this elite Nuggets offense, and is still under contract for multiple seasons that rids of any concern that this is a short-term rental.
It’d only be a trade done if the Nuggets feel like Braun won’t be trending upwards any time soon, and their upcoming extension will only be a hinderance to their long-term growth. On the surface, it feels like Denver might not have reached that point with their young wing following one bumpy season just yet.
However, that doesn’t mean a deal like this doesn’t have value that the Nuggets could heavily consider.
Especially in what would be a great way to bolster their defensive upside next season, adding Washington could effectively allow Denver to lift off the ground as better than a bottom-10 defense in the league like they were in 2025-26.
The Nuggets adding in a first-round pick to sweeten the pot might not be totally preferable. But for where Braun and his value currently stand, walking out of a deal like this without giving up draft compensation feels pretty unlikely.
A 26th-overall pick, while valuable, isn’t the end of the world for the Nuggets’ forfeit, and might actually be what tips the Mavericks over the edge to be onboard with a move like such.
Iif the Nuggets want to truly maximize their roster on both ends, adding Washington offers a good chance of being able to do just that. So if the Mavericks were one of the select teams willing to take on the risk that Braun has baked in, this could be a deal Denver considers pulling the trigger on.
Sign up for our free Denver Nuggets On SI newsletter, and get breaking Nuggets news delivered to your inbox daily!
Add us as a preferred source on GoogleFollow
Seattle, WA
Seattle Hotel Workers Are on the Verge of Striking Ahead of the World Cup – The Stranger
Call it labor unrest summer? Unionized journalists across the Northwest at McClatchy Media went on a one-day strike over AI policy, union employees at acclaimed restaurant the Walrus and the Carpenter are willing to strike, and today unionized hotel workers at the Hilton’s Embassy Suites in Pioneer Square are voting to authorize a strike. The union is collecting votes until 6 p.m. this evening.
The contract between management and the 113 unionized Embassy Suites employees expired on May 31. Today, workers—represented by Unite Here Local 8, a hospitality union—are expected to vote to authorize a work stoppage, and give leadership the ability to call a strike at any time. Seattle’s World Cup games kick off at Lumen Field in less than two weeks, steps away from Embassy Suites.
The main issues at play are health insurance, pay—Hilton’s current offer amounts to a less than $1 per hour raise on average over the next five years—and a proposal, so far rejected by Hilton, that management tell employees when ICE or DHS is on the property.
“As a brown woman, I know ICE does not care whether you are a US citizen,” Dom Kaur, a front desk agent, said in a press release. “What they are doing goes against my core moral beliefs. My dad needed asylum and as a lawyer now helps others. It is wrong for our bosses to sit there and say they cannot do anything about it.”
ICE concerns are heightened because the agency may be on hand at Lumen during the World Cup. A majority of the staff are people of color or immigrants, says Victoria Davidson, a public area attendant at Embassy Suites. “ICE will have a presence because of FIFA, and it’s not OK for people to be afraid to come to work,” Davidson says.
Hilton did not respond before press time. An automatic email from the US press office said that it was “currently closed” on Friday afternoon.
If the union strikes, Davidson anticipates that managers would initially do the jobs of unionized workers, and then Hilton would turn to temp staffing agencies to recruit scabs. Even though the hotel would remain open, the union believes that a strike during the World Cup would cause enough problems for hotel operations that workers have a lot of leverage at this moment.
“This is not going to happen again for at least 25 to 30 years,” Davidson says of the World Cup matches, “and we’re the only hotel that’s right here.”
Related
-
Sports1 minute agoBroncos star Jonathan Cooper arrested on domestic violence charges
-
Technology8 minutes agoWill a four-armed robot replace astronauts in space?
-
Business11 minutes agoSoFi Stadium workers vote to authorize strike with World Cup days away
-
Entertainment16 minutes agoCalifornia and other states may sue to block Paramount-Warner Bros. deal
-
Lifestyle23 minutes agoFor its first L.A. women’s show, Hermès touches down in Bel-Air — Birkin bags everywhere
-
Politics26 minutes agoHow a simple mix-up fueled false conspiracies about L.A. vote count
-
Science31 minutes ago
Scientists probe cosmic visitor from deep space, come up empty in search for alien life
-
Sports38 minutes agoAlison Lee moves into prime position to challenge for U.S. Women’s Open title
