TRUE – CO Supreme Court Makes Illegal Ruling To Alter Election Results


Donald J. Trump has never even been CHARGED with the crime of “Insurrection”, much less convicted. This makes this claim: TRUE

  • In order for a court to take action, a jury must convict a defendant of a crime. The Colorado Supreme Court is in direct violation of the law by ordering President Trump removed from the state ballot.
  • The crime of “Insurrection” is defined in Title 18 U.S. Code 2383 as:
    • Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
  • Courts cannot make judgements on crimes, only a jury can convict someone unless that defendant waives the right to trial by jury.
  • No precedent has been set for claiming that Donald J. Trump participated in the crime of “Insurrection”.


The fundamental tenet of justice in the United States dictates that before a court can take action against an individual accused of a crime, a jury must convict them. However, recent events in Colorado have sparked controversy and debate, raising concerns about the boundaries of legal authority and due process.

Colorado Supreme Court’s Decision on Trump Ballot Removal: A Question of Legal Authority

The Colorado Supreme Court’s decision to order the removal of President Donald J. Trump from the state’s ballot due to alleged involvement in the crime of “Insurrection” has ignited a firestorm of legal analysis and public scrutiny. The crux of the matter revolves around whether such a decision aligns with established legal principles and the due process rights enshrined in the law.

At the core of this issue is the definition of the crime of “Insurrection,” as outlined in Title 18 U.S. Code 2383. It delineates that individuals who incite, assist, engage in, or provide aid to any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States may face fines, imprisonment, and be barred from holding office under federal jurisdiction.

However, crucially, courts do not possess the authority to convict individuals of crimes. This power rests solely with a jury unless the accused waives their right to a trial by jury. The foundational concept of the right to a fair trial by a jury of peers ensures impartiality and guards against arbitrary judgments.

The decision by the Colorado Supreme Court to remove President Trump from the state ballot raises significant legal questions. It prompts concerns about the violation of due process rights by bypassing the essential step of a jury conviction. This decision appears to overstep the bounds of judicial authority, raising doubts about the appropriateness of a court taking action against an individual based on allegations of a crime without a formal conviction.

Moreover, precedent plays a pivotal role in legal proceedings. No precedent exists to support the claim that Donald J. Trump participated in the crime of “Insurrection.” Absence of established legal precedent weakens the foundation of such a decision, underscoring the need for a rigorous examination of evidence and due process before any punitive action can be considered.

While the events of January 6th, 2021, at the U.S. Capitol prompted widespread condemnation and scrutiny of individuals’ roles, determining culpability for specific crimes requires a thorough legal process. Allegations alone, without due process and a fair trial, cannot form the basis for punitive measures by a court.

The Colorado Supreme Court’s action in this instance challenges the principles of justice and the rule of law. It presents a contentious debate on the boundaries of judicial authority and the adherence to established legal processes.


Colorado Supreme Court’s decision to remove President Trump from the Colorado ballot on the grounds of alleged participation in the crime of “Insurrection” raises serious concerns about the judiciary’s adherence to due process and established legal principles. It underscores the importance of upholding the fundamental rights of individuals, including the right to a fair trial by a jury, as the cornerstone of justice in a democratic society.