Your turn: The Colorado Supreme Court made a mistake removing Trump from the ballot

Many people think that the most difficult part of a judge’s job is keeping his wig powdered or getting splinters from pounding his gavel. While those are very real concerns, there is a more serious problem that all judges face. That is keeping their personal biases out of their decisions.

No matter what some people tell you, everyone is biased. We all have experiences and opinions that shape our view of the world. In the civilian world, there is nothing inherently wrong by having opinions about people and events that one encounters. Each person brings their own beliefs to situations in life.

But, when a judge takes the bench, he must recognize his biases and try to keep them from affecting into his decisions. It isn’t easy and the ability to do it separates the good judges from the rest.

More: Your turn: Biden is old, Trump is immature. Is this really the best we have to offer?

One particularly virulent bias infecting millions of people is Presidential Derangement Syndrome. The symptoms are that the infected person is unable to be objective about anything done by the president whom he hates. I first noticed it in people who hated Bill Clinton and it has continued through every president since.

In the past few years, it has been most clearly manifested as Trump Derangement. It is widespread among politicians, officials and, especially, members of the media. Trump hates them and they obviously hate him.

No matter how much a public official believes Orange Man Bad, judges have an obligation to their profession and their oath of office to recognize that they are infected with it and to try to remove it from their decision-making process.

That brings us to the recent decision by the Colorado Supreme Court which ruled that Trump cannot appear on the Republican primary ballot. The case is a big one—213 pages to be exact. To save you time, I have read the decision and the dissents so you don’t have to wade through a bunch of frightfully boring legalese.

My main takeaway is that the majority of the Colorado Supreme court has a bad case of Trump Derangement Syndrome. Since three of them went to Ivy League law schools and the fourth went to Teddy Kennedy’s alma mater, it’s no wonder that they hate Trump and were willing to twist logic beyond the breaking point to do anything to hurt him.

Their decision is full of jargon that is really not worth enduring. If you don’t believe me, maybe you’ll believe the other democrats on the Colorado court. (They went to law schools in our galaxy.) Justice Boatright said the Ivy Leaguers “contorted” the statute to reach their decision.

Justice Samour was a little more direct in his dissent saying that he felt his colleagues had “turned [the 14th amendment] on its head … Respectfully, they have it backwards.” He finally just says, “I respectfully submit that they are flat out wrong.” You don’t need a law degree to understand that.

Let’s strip away the legal jargon and talk brass tacks. The case for keeping Trump off the ballot is based on the 14th amendment to the Constitution. Passed after the Civil War, it was intended to keep former Confederates from holding public office in the United States if they “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or [gave] aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”

Thus, the issue ultimately becomes “is the Trumpster guilty of insurrection?” The majority on the Colorado Supreme court relied primarily on testimony given to and the conclusions of the House January 6 Committee to determine that Trump had “engaged in insurrection." They acknowledged there are several definitions of the word insurrection, but they decided that no matter what it means, Trump did it.

The problem with that is that there is a precise legal definition of the word. It is found in 18 U.S. Code § 2383, which defines the act and makes it a felony. Trump has never been charged with that crime, let alone been convicted of it.

The fact that no due process was afforded to the person they were alleging committed a felony did not deter the Colorado Supreme Court from acting as policeman, prosecutor and jury. They didn’t need facts; it was enough that they hated Trump.

Unless and until Trump is charged and convicted of insurrection, the efforts to disqualify him under the 14th amendment are nothing but political retribution. Until Trump has his day in court on a charge of insurrection, it does not apply.

The Colorado Supreme Court, the Maine Secretary of State and anyone else who removes his name from the ballot are doing so only because of their personal political bias. I suggest they go back to powdering their wigs and leave the political decisions to the people.

Harry Bulkeley is a retired Knox County judge and a local historian.

This article originally appeared on Rockford Register Star: Your turn: Trump shouldn't have been removed from ballots in Colorado