In a move that would have made George Washington and his men saddle their horses, the Colorado Supreme Court has made a move that our nations Founders warned us about.

The tyrannical and liberal Colorado Supreme Court has voted to keep President Donald J. Trump, the 45th President, and favorite to win the presidency in 2024 off of the ballot.

Their reasoning is over something he hasn’t even been convicted of. This is what tyranny looks like America.

In a polarizing decision, the Colorado Supreme Court has taken an unprecedented step by deeming former President Donald Trump ineligible for the White House under the U.S. Constitution’s insurrection clause and striking him from the state’s presidential primary ballot. This ruling paves the way for a potentially momentous showdown in the nation’s highest court to determine the fate of the GOP frontrunner’s candidacy.

It’s worth noting that all the justices on Colorado’s highest court were appointed by Democratic governors, adding a layer of political complexity to this case. This marks the first instance in history where Section 3 of the 14th Amendment has been invoked to disqualify a presidential contender.

In their 4-3 decision, the court asserted, “A majority of the court holds that Trump is disqualified from holding the office of president under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.”

The ruling by the Colorado Supreme Court overturns a previous decision by a district court judge who had acknowledged Trump’s role in the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack but was hesitant to bar him from the ballot, citing ambiguity regarding whether this provision applied to the presidency.

“We do not reach these conclusions lightly,” wrote the court’s majority. “We are mindful of the magnitude and weight of the questions now before us. We are likewise mindful of our solemn duty to apply the law, without fear or favor, and without being swayed by public reaction to the decisions that the law mandates we reach.”

The court has temporarily stayed its decision until January 4 or until the U.S. Supreme Court weighs in on the matter. Colorado officials argue that the issue must be resolved by January 5 to meet the state’s deadline for printing presidential primary ballots.

Trump’s legal team had previously vowed to appeal any disqualification to the nation’s highest court, which holds ultimate authority on constitutional matters.

“The Colorado Supreme Court issued a completely flawed decision tonight and we will swiftly file an appeal to the United States Supreme Court and a concurrent request for a stay of this deeply undemocratic decision,” Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung said in a statement Tuesday night.

Although Trump lost Colorado by a significant margin in the 2020 election and doesn’t necessarily rely on the state to secure victory in the upcoming presidential race, the concern for the former president lies in the potential ripple effect of other states and courts following Colorado’s lead in excluding him from crucial battleground states.

Numerous lawsuits have been filed nationwide to disqualify Trump under Section 3, originally designed to prevent former Confederates from regaining government positions after the Civil War. It disqualifies individuals who took an oath to “support” the Constitution and subsequently engaged in insurrection or rebellion against it. However, it has been invoked only infrequently since the decade following the Civil War.

Derek Muller, a law professor at Notre Dame closely following these Section 3 cases, noted, “I think it may embolden other state courts or secretaries to act now that the bandage has been ripped off. This is a major threat to Trump’s candidacy.”

The Colorado case represents the first instance in which the plaintiffs have successfully employed Section 3 to disqualify a candidate. The district judge, Sarah B. Wallace, found that Trump had indeed “engaged in insurrection” by inciting the January 6 attack on the Capitol, but her ruling to keep him on the ballot was rooted in technical arguments.

“President Trump asks us to hold that Section 3 disqualifies every oathbreaking insurrectionist except the most powerful one and that it bars oath-breakers from virtually every office, both state and federal, except the highest one in the land,” the court’s majority opinion said. “Both results are inconsistent with the plain language and history of Section 3.”

Trump’s legal team had contended that Section 3 doesn’t apply to the president since the language specifically refers to “officers of the United States,” excluding the presidency from its scope. They argued that the president’s oath is distinct, focusing on the commitment to “preserve, protect, and defend” the Constitution. Additionally, the provision includes other offices under the United States but doesn’t explicitly mention the presidency.

However, the Colorado Supreme Court disagreed with this interpretation, aligning with the arguments put forth by attorneys representing six Colorado Republican and unaffiliated voters. They argued that it would be illogical to assume that the framers of the amendment intended to bar former Confederates from lower-level offices while allowing them to seek the highest office in the nation.

“Our Constitution clearly states that those who violate their oath by attacking our democracy are barred from serving in government,” its president, Noah Bookbinder, said in a statement.

The court’s majority opinion stated, “Both results are inconsistent with the plain language and history of Section 3.”

The Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a left-leaning organization that initiated the Colorado case, hailed the court’s decision, emphasizing the importance of upholding the Constitution’s principles.

Trump’s legal team also sought to reverse the ruling that Trump incited the Capitol attack, asserting that he was merely exercising his right to free speech and did not call for violence. They characterized the event as a “riot” rather than an insurrection.

However, several justices expressed skepticism about this argument, with Justice William W. Hood III noting, “Why isn’t it enough that a violent mob breached the Capitol when Congress was performing a core constitutional function? In some ways, that seems like a poster child for insurrection.”

In their Tuesday ruling, the court’s majority dismissed the argument that Trump bore no responsibility for the violent attack by his supporters, emphasizing that he had exhorted his followers to fight at the Capitol.

The Colorado Supreme Court’s decision was divided, with Justices Richard L. Gabriel, Melissa Hart, William W. Hood III, and Monica Márquez ruling in favor of the petitioners, while Chief Justice Brian D. Boatright dissented, suggesting that the constitutional issues at hand were too intricate for a state hearing. Justices Maria E. Berkenkotter and Carlos Samour also dissented, emphasizing the need for due process before disqualifying someone from public office.

This ruling in Colorado contrasts with the recent decision of the Minnesota Supreme Court, which allowed the state party to include any candidate on its primary ballot and dismissed a Section 3 lawsuit, leaving open the possibility of revisiting the issue in the general election. In a separate 14th Amendment case in Michigan, a judge ruled that Congress, not the judiciary, should decide whether Trump can remain on the ballot, with that ruling currently under appeal. Liberal groups, including Free Speech For People, have been involved in these Section 3 lawsuits, despite Trump’s assertions that President Joe Biden is orchestrating these efforts.

Trump’s supporters have vigorously criticized the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision, characterizing it as “un-American” and “insane,” and alleging that it is part of a politically motivated campaign to thwart his candidacy. House Republican Conference Chair Elise Stefanik voiced her disapproval, stating, “Four partisan Democrat operatives on the Colorado Supreme Court think they get to decide for all Coloradans and Americans the next presidential election.”