Robert F. Kennedy Jr., an independent presidential candidate with left-leaning views, expressed profound disappointment in the recent decision of Colorado’s Supreme Court. The ruling, preventing former President Donald Trump from appearing on the state’s 2024 ballot, drew a vigorous reaction from Kennedy.
Characterizing the state’s high court as heavily influenced by Democratic leanings, Kennedy strongly criticized their Tuesday verdict. He denounced the decision, labeling Trump’s actions on January 6, 2021, as an “insurrection” and citing this as the basis for disqualifying him from seeking reelection under the 14th Amendment.
Kennedy highlighted the contradiction from a lower court’s perspective and condemned the high court’s action as a potential threat to democratic processes. He likened the decision to tactics more reminiscent of a dictatorship than those befitting a democratic nation.
“Trump blocked from the ballot in Colorado. When a court in another country disqualifies an opposition candidate from running, we say, ‘That’s not a real democracy.’ Now it’s happening here,” Kennedy wrote on social media Tuesday.
He followed that up, writing, “I’m not a Trump supporter (if I were, I wouldn’t be running against him!) But I want to beat him in a fair election, not because he was kicked off the ballot. Let the voters choose, not the courts!”
Trump blocked from the ballot in Colorado. When a court in another country disqualifies an opposition candidate from running, we say, “That’s not a real democracy.” Now it’s happening here.
— Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) December 20, 2023
Expressing profound disapproval, the Colorado Republican Party is deeply troubled by what they see as a glaringly biased ruling. They’ve even gone to the extent of threatening to withdraw from participating in the state primaries if this decision is upheld.
Simultaneously, Kennedy persisted in articulating his apprehensions regarding what he views as a direct assault on American democratic principles. Expanding on his initial remarks, he delved into a detailed thread, emphasizing the gravity of the issue in question.
“Every American should be troubled by the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision to remove President Trump from the ballot. The court has deprived him of a consequential right without having been convicted of a crime,” the former Democrat candidate wrote.
“This was done without an evidentiary hearing in which he is given the basic right of confronting his accusers. When any candidate is deprived of his right to run, the American people are deprived of their right to choose.”
“I hope the Colorado Supreme Court swiftly reverses this decision. At the very least, it contributes to the perception that the elites are picking the President by manipulating the legal system, and through other interventions. If Trump is kept out of office through judicial fiat rather than being defeated in a fair election, his supporters will never accept the result. This country will become ungovernable.”
“It’s time to trust the voters. It is up to the people to decide who the best candidate is. Not the courts. The people. That’s Democracy 101,” he said.
It’s important to highlight that the four individuals comprising the Colorado “justices” responsible for the decision to bar Trump from the state’s ballot are all political appointees with distinct inclinations toward the far left.
Examining these four figures closely—Justices Richard L. Gabriel, William W. Hood III, Melissa Hart, and Monica Márquez, several of whom have Ivy League backgrounds—they collectively formed the majority vote. Conversely, three other justices dissented from this decision.
Gabriel, recognized for his substantial expertise in property law, additionally pursues a life as a jazz musician. Despite facing accusations of gender discrimination and harassment, he was exonerated in an investigation, as reported by the Daily Mail.
Melissa Hart’s legal career primarily centered on academia, serving as a professor. She faced accusations of racial and age discrimination by a black job applicant, but a federal judge dismissed the case, as reported by the Daily Mail.
In conclusion, Monica Márquez’s court appointment gained notice due to her advocacy as a prominent gay rights activist. Her selection appeared to align with the Democrats’ focus on racial representation, designating her as the “first Latina Justice,” fitting into the Democrats’ identity politics playbook.
