| Trump v. Anderson | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued February 8, 2024 Decided March 4, 2024 | |
| Full case name | Donald J. Trump v. Norma Anderson, Michelle Priola, Claudine Cmarada, Krista Kafer, Kathi Wright, and Christopher Castilian |
| Docket no. | 23-719 |
| Citations | 601 U.S. 100 (more) |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Decision | Opinion |
| Case history | |
| Prior |
|
| Holding | |
| Only Congress, not the states, can determine eligibility for federal office under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment. Colorado Supreme Court reversed. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Per curiam | |
| Concurrence | Barrett (in part and in judgment) |
| Concurrence | Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson (in judgment) |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 3 | |
| January 6 United States Capitol attack |
|---|
| Timeline • Planning |
| Background |
| Participants |
| Aftermath |
Trump v. Anderson, 601 U.S. 100 (2024), is a U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court unanimously held that states could not determine eligibility for federal office, including the presidency, under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment. In December 2023, the Colorado Supreme Court rejected former president Donald Trump's presidential eligibility on the basis of his actions during the January 6 Capitol attack, adhering to the Fourteenth Amendment disqualification theory. The case was known as Anderson v. Griswold in the Colorado state courts.
The Colorado Supreme Court held that Trump's actions before and during the attack constituted engagement in insurrection; their assertion is that Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment disqualifies presidential candidates who have engaged in insurrection against the United States. The Colorado Supreme Court's ruling in Anderson v. Griswold was the first time that a presidential candidate was disqualified from office in a state on the basis of the Fourteenth Amendment. The court stayed its decision until a ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court.
On January 5, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court granted Trump's petition for a writ of certiorari seeking review of the Colorado Supreme Court ruling in Anderson v. Griswold on an accelerated pace; oral arguments were held on February 8, 2024. On March 4, 2024, the Supreme Court issued a per curiam ruling reversing the Colorado Supreme Court decision. All nine justices held that an individual state cannot determine eligibility under Section 3 for federal office holders, and that such power is conferred exclusively to the federal government. A majority of the court also ruled the section to be non-justiciable, and that only Congress can enforce Section 3, i.e. the courts (federal or otherwise) cannot declare a candidate ineligible for office under Section 3 unless an Act of Congress explicitly grants them that power. Four justices disagreed with the latter ruling, and expressed concern in concurrences that this decision went further than needed.