Law must ignore the political hand-wringing around Trump

Get free access to the Editor's Digest

Every week, Roula Khalaf, who holds the position of Editor at the FT, picks and showcases her preferred stories in a newsletter.

Lawsuits against a past leader who is also currently leading the way for his political party's national candidacy are unavoidably influenced by politics, despite the legal representatives and judges stating that their actions are purely to uphold the principles of equal justice under the law.

The most recent group to support this idea is the Colorado supreme court. They made a strong statement on Tuesday that prevented Donald Trump from participating in the state's primary election. The majority of the justices on the court were aware of their responsibility to follow the law impartially. They did not let public opinion influence their decision-making process.

The court in Colorado, as well as federal and local prosecutors who have charged Trump four times, as well as congressional leaders who have impeached him twice, are correct. The principle of equal treatment under the law is one of the most important democratic principles, especially now that Trump and other similar politicians are beginning to exhibit authoritarian tendencies.

As soon as the Colorado decision was made, there were concerns about its potential impact on politics. Some feared that it would only strengthen Trump and his supporters' resolve by providing a clear example of political leaders who wanted to prevent the former president from running for re-election. Trump has already used his federal and state indictments to galvanize his base and raise money, just as he did with the "witch hunts" of his two impeachments.

It is possible that the straightforwardness of the majority may not last for a long time. The Colorado decision is expected to be invalidated by the United States Supreme Court, which has a majority of Republicans, in a few weeks' time. As a result, Trump will be added back to the primary ballot in Colorado and any other anti-Trump efforts in other states will be terminated.

The ruling on Tuesday has caused major problems for Donald Trump's Republican competitors. This is particularly challenging for Nikki Haley, the former governor of South Carolina, who was starting to gain support in Iowa and New Hampshire. Instead of attacking the frontrunner in the lead up to the first Republican votes, Haley has to support Trump in his legal fight. On Tuesday night, she pledged to defeat Trump fairly and without any interference from the courts – it's up to the voters to decide.

Indeed, in the topsy-turvy world of American politics in the 21st century, being accused of insurrection by a prominent court in the United States could potentially aid Donald Trump in securing the Republican nomination for the 2024 presidential race. This may even stir up considerable anger and sway undecided voters towards supporting him in the general election come November.

So, what other options are there? Despite US civic books praising the benefits of expressing one's thoughts freely and being able to vote, the actual foundation of any democracy is formed by its legal and administrative systems. If you ask individuals in a nation that holds honest and impartial elections but has biased or corrupted judicial and law enforcement departments, such as India, Turkey, or Hungary, if they live in an authentic democratic society, you'll probably receive a vague response.

This implies that Jack Smith, who has been assigned to manage federal lawsuits against the ex-president, as well as local prosecutors in Manhattan and Georgia, must keep advancing their cases against Trump. The judges in Colorado made the correct choice by taking legal action against the former president in the state's ballot. Even though these legal moves may assist Trump's political aspirations, not taking action would be detrimental to democracy.

Make an offer to have lunch with Peter Spiegel and support the Financial Literacy and Inclusion Campaign, the charity of the FT. Check ft.com/appeal to discover the other individuals available for this opportunity.

This article was edited to fix the names of the authors of the ruling from the Colorado supreme court.