California Democrats want Trump off their ballot too

California Democrats are hoping a Tuesday court decision disqualifying former President Trump from the Colorado primary ballot will boost their efforts to bounce him from California's Republican primary, as a key deadline approaches next week.

Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis, a Democrat who is running for governor in 2026, sent a letter Wednesday to California Secretary of State Shirley Weber, who oversees elections in the state, urging her "to explore every legal option" to remove Trump from the March 5 ballot because of his role in the Jan. 6 insurrection.

"This decision is about honoring the rule of law in our country and protecting the fundamental pillars of democracy," she wrote, citing the Colorado Supreme Court's 4-3 decision to bar Trump from the ballot in that state.

The court immediately put its decision on hold with the expectation that the U.S. Supreme Court will weigh in. If the high court in Washington, D.C., agrees to hear the case, its ruling would probably affect primary and general election ballots across the country , according to election law experts.

Read more: Opinion: Colorado's ruling against Trump raises questions only the Supreme Court can answer

But with state-by-state primaries approaching, the process for creating ballots is moving forward quickly.

Weber released a preliminary list of likely candidates, including Trump, on Dec. 8 and will mail a certified list of candidates to county elections officials on Dec. 28 so that they can begin printing ballots. Although ballots could be amended later, changing them gets harder — and more expensive — as the election date draws nearer.

“We’re reviewing the case to assess its impact,” said Joe Kocurek, the deputy secretary of state for communications.

Weber's office has been sued four times over Trump's right to ballot access. Plaintiffs in two of those cases have indicated they plan to drop them; one has recently been filed, and Weber has been removed as a defendant in a fourth, according to her office.

Assemblyman Evan Low, a Silicon Valley Democrat, leads a group of nine lawmakers who sent a letter in September asking Democratic state Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta to drop Trump from the ballot in an effort to force the courts to make a decision.

Read more: Letters to the Editor: Should Trump be kicked off the ballot? Either way, America is in a dark place

"There's greater justification on seeking a court opinion now," Low said Wednesday.

Bonta did not respond to the group's letter, and the delay in getting clarity from the courts only heightens the danger that the election will be disrupted, Low said.

“No one is above the law, and the courts should enforce the Constitution. Period. Full stop,” he said.

Campaign representatives for Trump, who is leading Republican primary polls by a wide margin, did not respond to requests for comment. Nor did Bonta's office.

Read more: Trump is poised to dominate Iowa caucuses despite barely campaigning there

Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung previously accused “Joe Biden, Democrats and Never Trumpers" of stretching the law "beyond recognition" because they fear polls showing Trump winning a general election matchup against Biden.

Election law experts doubt the Supreme Court will uphold the Colorado case, in large part because justices will not want to be seen as taking away voters' choices. But the case is likely to increase pressure on the high court, as well as state courts, to take a stand. Any successful ballot challenge in California would probably reach the high court as well.

The Colorado ruling "will attitudinally impact other state supreme courts,” said Ben Ginsberg, who represented George W. Bush in the 2000 Florida recount case that put Bush in the White House.

But because each state has different rules governing primaries, Colorado's exact rationale for disqualifying Trump will not necessarily hold in other states, Ginsberg said. He believes it's more important for the court to decide on Trump's eligibility for the general election ballot before November, so that it does not become an issue in certifying the final results.

“We need an answer sooner rather than later," agreed Jessica Levinson, an election law professor at Loyola Law School. "This is a legal question with huge political impact, and I think people need to know what the law allows and provides.”

A potential U.S. Supreme Court decision on Colorado would have the greatest effect on other states if the court rules on the central issue — whether Trump can be disqualified based on the Constitution's insurrection clause — rather than procedural grounds, she said.

State officials elsewhere may be waiting to see the outcome before acting. A ruling in Trump's favor would give them less reason to act. A ruling that upholds Colorado's decision that he's ineligible would open the door for other states to follow suit.

“That becomes open season for other states to say, 'We also think the former president is not eligible,'" she said. "It doesn't mean what Colorado does is binding, but it's hugely persuasive.”

Get the best of the Los Angeles Times’ politics coverage with the Essential Politics newsletter.

This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.