The decision by the fully Democrat-appointed Colorado Supreme Court in December to remove former President Trump from the Republican primary ballot was just the beginning of rogue officials weaponizing the 14th Amendment and interfering with Republican voters' ability to choose a presidential nominee. Last week, Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows joined the Colorado Supreme Court in determininging former President Trump ineligible to be listed on the Republican primary ballot under the guise of the 14th Amendment's ban on "insurrectionists" holding office.

As Fox News points out, this is the same person who decried the common sense practice of voter ID a few years ago:

The Maine official who moved to disqualify former President Trump from the state's 2024 Republican primary ballot last week has previously said that voter ID laws are "rooted in White supremacy."

Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows made the claim while giving testimony to the legislature in April 2021, expressing her opposition to proposed state laws that would require voters to show photo identification to cast a ballot.

"Passing these bills would mean putting into statute discriminatory practices rooted in White supremacy," Bellows said during her testimony. "Today, voter ID laws are the new means of voter suppression."

Now, National Review reports that members of the New York City Council have signed on to a letter urging the New York State Board of Elections to take similar action to Maine and remove former President Trump from the ballot:

Councilman Shekar Krishnan’s office sent the letter to other members of the council this week asking them to sign-on in support, according to an email obtained by National Review.  .  .

Republican councilwoman Joann Ariola did not sign-on in support, nor did Democratic councilman Robert Holden. 

“Removing a candidate from the ballot for no legal or regulatory reasons is a direct threat to democracy,” Holden said in a statement to National Review. “This trend across the nation, including here in New York, is dangerous. If you are against a candidate, you work hard to beat them at the polls, not prevent them from participating in an election.”

Ariola said the letter is “little more than political grandstanding, and a distraction from the array of serious issues facing New York City.”

The Supreme Court is expected to weigh in on the Maine and/or Colorado cases soon. The Washington Post explained:

The decisions in Maine and Colorado have put pressure on the Supreme Court to get involved soon. The voters who initiated the Colorado challenge have asked the court to agree to take up the case when it meets privately on Jan. 5 and issue a decision by Feb. 11, a day before ballots will begin to be mailed to most Colorado voters. That time frame would be extraordinarily fast for the court but not unprecedented.

“In Bush v. Gore they ruled in three days,” said University of Notre Dame law professor Derek Muller, citing the decision that determined George W. Bush won the 2000 presidential election. “Is it realistic that they could issue a decision by mid-February? It’s completely realistic.”

The Colorado decision put pressure on the Supreme Court to act, and the Maine decision only amplifies it, Muller said.

Join RNLA this Friday, January 5, for a special webinar on this topic featuring Professor Muller and the Manhattan Institute's Ilya Shapiro. Register here!