Trump v. Anderson
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Trump v. Anderson and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Trump v. Anderson.
The Supreme Court reversed the Colorado Supreme Court's decision to exclude former President Trump from the state's 2024 Presidential primary ballot. The Court determined that the Constitution grants Congress, not the states, the authority to enforce Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment regarding federal officeholders and candidates. This decision emphasizes the federal government's role in maintaining a uniform approach to disqualification under Section 3.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Trump v. Anderson.
The Court held that the Colorado Supreme Court erred in ordering former President Trump excluded from Colorado's 2024 Presidential primary ballot.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Trump v. Anderson. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why State–Federal Power is relevant to Trump v. Anderson
The case primarily concerns the allocation of authority between state and federal governments regarding enforcement of Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Because the Constitution makes Congress, rather than the States, responsible for enforcing Section 3 against federal offceholders and candidates, the Colorado Supreme Court erred in ordering former President Trump excluded from Colorado's 2024 Presidential primary ballot.
-
Why Equal Protection is relevant to Trump v. Anderson
The Fourteenth Amendment's Section 3 is discussed in terms of its historical purpose to ensure equal protection by preventing insurrectionists from holding office.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Section 3 was designed to help ensure an enduring Union by preventing former Confederates from returning to power.
-
Why Judicial Review is relevant to Trump v. Anderson
The Court exercises its power of judicial review to determine the constitutional allocation of enforcement authority under Section 3.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The Constitution empowers Congress to prescribe how those determinations should be made.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Trump v. Anderson that support the summary and concepts above.
The Constitution makes Congress, rather than the States, responsible for enforcing Section 3 against federal offceholders and candidates.
Section 3 was designed to help ensure an enduring Union by preventing former Confederates from returning to power.
States lack the constitutional authority to enforce Section 3 with respect to federal offces, especially the Presidency.
