DENVER — The Colorado district judge presiding over the first high-stakes lawsuit seeking to bar former President Donald Trump from a state’s 2024 presidential ballot issued a protective order on Friday, formally prohibiting threats and intimidation.
Judge Sarah B. Wallace stated that safeguarding everyone involved including herself and her staff was essential as the unprecedented litigation proceeds.
Judge Cites Safety Concerns in Granting Order
“I 100 percent understand everybody’s concerns for the parties, the lawyers, and frankly myself and my staff based on what we’ve seen in other cases,” Judge Wallace said in court while agreeing to the order. The directive forbids parties in the case from making statements that could be construed as threatening or intimidating.
Trump Attorney Opposes Order, Cites Existing Laws
The order was opposed by Scott Gessler, a former Colorado secretary of state who is representing Trump in the proceedings. Gessler argued that a specific protective order was unnecessary because threats and intimidation are already illegal under state and federal law. He also noted that heated rhetoric in the case has originated from multiple sides of the political spectrum.
“We do have robust political debate going on here,” Gessler stated. “For better or worse, this case has become a focal point.”
Order Sought by Group Invoking 14th Amendment
The request for the protective order was made by attorneys for the liberal watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). CREW is the plaintiff in the lawsuit, which seeks to disqualify Trump from the Colorado ballot under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. This rarely invoked Civil War-era clause prohibits anyone who swore an oath to support the Constitution and then “engaged in insurrection” from holding office.
Nationwide Challenges Under the Insurrection Clause
Dozens of similar lawsuits have been filed across the country, all centering on Trump’s actions related to the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. The plaintiffs argue his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results and the subsequent riot constitute engagement in an insurrection, triggering the disqualification clause.
The Colorado case is the first such challenge brought by an organization with substantial legal resources. The core constitutional issue is widely expected to ultimately reach the U.S. Supreme Court, which has never issued a ruling on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
Colorado Case on a Fast Track for Resolution
Judge Wallace has scheduled an October 30 hearing to examine whether Trump must be removed under Colorado election law, which bars candidates who are not constitutionally qualified from appearing on the ballot.
She has emphasized her intent to give the Colorado Supreme Court and potentially the U.S. Supreme Court maximum time to review any appeal before the state’s January 5 deadline to finalize its 2024 presidential primary ballot.
Parallel Case in Minnesota and Pending Motions
A parallel case in Minnesota, filed by another well-financed liberal group, is scheduled for a hearing before that state’s supreme court on November 2.
Meanwhile, in the Colorado case, Trump’s legal team is scheduled to file two motions to dismiss the lawsuit. One motion will argue the litigation constitutes an attempt to retaliate against Trump’s free speech rights. Judge Wallace has set an October 13 hearing to debate that specific claim.
Attorney Points to Trump’s Social Media Habits in Seeking Protection
During Friday’s hearing, plaintiff attorney Sean Grimsley cited the need for the protective order by pointing to a recent federal case. He noted that special counsel Jack Smith recently sought a gag order against Trump due to threats stemming from the federal prosecution for alleged election interference.
“At least one of the parties has a tendency to tweet or Truth Social,” Grimsley said, referring to Trump’s preferred social media platform, “about witnesses and the courts.”
