Wisconsin election authorities declined to review a complaint seeking the removal of former President Donald Trump from the state’s primary ballot, thereby granting Trump a victory in this particular case.
The complaint, filed by Kirk Bangstad, owner of a Madison brewery, alleged that Trump’s involvement in the January 6, 2021 Capitol riot warranted his exclusion from the ballot.
Reported by The Hill on Friday, the Wisconsin Elections Commission promptly dismissed the complaint, citing procedural reasons as the basis for its decision.
Riley Vetterkind, a spokesperson for the commission, highlighted that the involvement of commission members as respondents led to the dismissal. Vetterkind stressed the necessity of ethical recusal when a complaint targets the commission or its members.
Bangstad’s complaint echoed similar attempts in Colorado and Maine, where removal proceedings based on the 14th Amendment were accepted pending legal appeals.
The argument revolved around the 14th Amendment, which bars individuals engaged in insurrection from holding office. Both the Maine Secretary of State and the Colorado Supreme Court found Trump’s actions on January 6 fell under this definition.
Despite the deadlock in Wisconsin, other states have grappled with analogous 14th Amendment claims.
A recent ruling in Michigan highlighted that the Secretary of State lacks the authority to ascertain candidates’ eligibility using the “insurrection clause” of the amendment.
Reacting to the decision in Wisconsin, Trump’s campaign criticized it as “election interference,” alleging it to be part of a broader trend aimed at undermining the democratic process.
Steven Cheung, a spokesperson for Trump’s campaign, emphasized, “We are witnessing, in real-time, the attempted theft of an election and the disenfranchisement of the American voter.” Cheung labeled these partisan election interference endeavors as a hostile assault on American democracy.
This decision in Wisconsin further complicates the ongoing debate surrounding the eligibility of political figures and the impact of the 14th Amendment on electoral processes as the 2024 elections draw nearer amidst these legal battles.
Each decision in these cases contributes to shaping the narrative of a critical political moment in the United States as the electoral landscape continues to evolve.
