EMERGENCY: Blue States RUSHING to get Trump Off Ballot

Today on Sekulow, it's an emergency as blue states are rushing to get Trump off the ballot before the US Supreme Court weighs in. Keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever, this is Sekulow. We want to hear from you. Share and post your comments or call 1-800-684-3110. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow.

Alright, welcome back to Sekulow. My dad's joining us back in the studio today. Yesterday, Dad, you were in very important meetings in Washington, D.C. involving Israel. We know that's a key issue for so many of our donors and folks. We have not forgotten that. I'm wearing it right now to bring them home. Now, on my neck, everywhere I go, every picture I take. We are going to keep going.

Take your calls at 1-800-684-3110. This is something we expected to see after Colorado. So, Colorado issues that decision. We talked about it yesterday.

My dad is in the studio with us today. And Dad, I want to go right to you because we are now seeing Colorado. We're seeing Michigan and a host of other blue states trying to take emergency action based off this Colorado decision. Not to go to court, but just instructing, like in California, it's the Lieutenant Governor who's running for Governor right now, instructed to the Secretary of State and said, based off this Colorado decision, can you just take this action alone as Secretary of State and remove President Trump from the California primary ballot? People may think, well, he has no chance of winning California.

That may be. But in a primary, that's a lot of primary votes that's very important to getting the nomination. Let me tell you why this is the greatest election interference in American history. The idea that you have a situation where a Presidential nominee, who is actually leading the party right now, could be removed from the ballot, which is what Colorado says right now, and then you've got a series of other states saying, we're going to do the same thing.

It has a dual effect. People that are supporting the President, former President, may say, well, he's not even going to be on the ballot, so I'm going to go to somebody else. That's election interference. And number two, they may not even vote.

I mean, they may say the whole thing's already rigged again. So look, we are taking direct, aggressive, the most direct and aggressive action you could take. We represent the Colorado Republican Party. We are petitioning for the Supreme Court of the United States.

Meanwhile, the California Lieutenant Governor is calling for Donald Trump to be removed from the ballot based on that Colorado decision. We can put it up on the screen right now. Let's put it up on the screen. I want to show it to people.

I'll read it. And she said, Dear Secretary Weber, this is from the Lieutenant Governor. She's running for governor right now. Dear Secretary Weber, based on the Colorado Supreme Court's ruling in Anderson versus Gridwalls, I urge you to explore every legal option to remove former President Donald Trump from California's 2024 Presidential primary ballot. And they're not asking necessarily that they need to go to court. But could the secretary of state alone rely on that Colorado ruling and say, well, if Colorado believes it's insurrection, then I as secretary of state, which is what we need to explain. We need to explain Colorado gave that power, the court, to the secretary of state to declare that this was insurrection and he could be removed. So these other states are now saying, well, then we can do the same thing because a court now has adjudicated that he's now it wasn't a federal court. And I think that what they're trying to do is, like in Michigan, like in California, and I expect a few more will come quickly. They're going to try to do this in a few more states. So it's not Colorado looking like the only crazy court that did this.

No, I think you're going to see I think you're going to see an avalanche of states. So, folks, if you're concerned about elections, first of all, I want to hear from you how important you think this case is, 800-684-3110. Let me tell you how important this case is. The most important election case in U.S. history.

The election integrity of the United States of America is on the line in this case. I have assembled our Supreme Court team. We represent the main party here. Well, there's two main parties, the former President and the Colorado GOP.

But let me tell you, the GOPs are the ones that are also really harmed by this because they're the ones that put up the candidates. Stand with us at the American Center for Law and Justice at ACLJ.org in our faith and freedom drive. We've got a team going. We're filing this petition next week at the Supreme Court right through Christmas. Our team's working. Your support of the ACLJ will make a huge difference.

Go to ACLJ.org. Any amount you donate will be doubled. I just want you to understand, this is not a fight we wanted to fight, but we are going to fight. We're going to use every resource we have to make sure you get to choose the candidate of your choice in the primary. This time it might be Donald Trump.

Who knows who it'll be in four years. Donate. ACLJ.org today. All right, welcome back to Secio. Yesterday, because we were getting all this information to you, I think we were only able to take one phone call. So with my dad here with us today, if you've got questions about this, give us a call at 1-800-684-3110 because this is now expanding outside of Colorado. We're seeing it would happen. We were already watching Michigan very closely, and we were talking about that yesterday, because we think they were watching Colorado, the Michigan Supreme Court. Now, California wants to do it without even going to court, and dad, my theory is they want to stack up a few of these so Colorado is not the only outlier. Because right now, Colorado looks like the crazy state court who did this four to three with all Democrat-appointed judges, knowing that they may not be right, so they state it for the Supreme Court indefinitely, really. And so these other states want to jump in and say, look, it's not just Colorado.

We don't want them on the ballot either, and kind of force the Supreme Court's hand to decide this. Look at the map right now where we've got litigation going on. This is where their cases are pending, voluntary dismissal by plaintiff and a couple, dismissed, and then Trump disqualified. I can go through the ACLJ, just what we're doing too.

That's fine. I mean, so an ACLJ in Colorado, we're heading to SCOTUS right now, preparing the cert petition. We have two pending appeals in Arizona and Michigan.

We've won in Florida, Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island, just to make sure you know that. We are voluntary dismissals after we entered the case in Maine, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Delaware, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Kansas, Oklahoma, Montana, California, Utah, Idaho, but that was in court in California. Now they're saying, because of the case, that they don't have to go to court in California. And what you have to understand on this is the highest court in a state, the Colorado Supreme Court has ruled that the President committed insurrection, number one, and number two, that triggered automatically section three of the 14th Amendment, and he's disqualified from appearing on the ballot. California immediately jumped on this with the Lieutenant Governor notifying the Secretary of State, because they don't have to have that same kind of court procedure to do the same thing. It's going to spread like wildfire. Go ahead.

Yeah, because we have 13 pending. I know that, but the most important thing here is if the Supreme Court has to get in here, this is what I want to get to. Whatever these state courts do is horrible, you know, if they rule against you, obviously, in a case like this, because it is the greatest form of election interference.

It's more than anything anybody's talked about. Any crazy conspiracy theories, any real election interference that took place. There's nothing as bad as a court saying a qualified candidate put up by the state party cannot appear on the ballot because a Secretary of State says so, or four judges of a court say so, when there's never been a federal charge of insurrection, period. And there's three legal questions here. First, for our client, the Colorado GOP, their right to freedom of association, to nominate the candidates of their choice, has been stopped, so that's a violation of the First Amendment. Number two, there is a violation because the President is uniquely not an officer of the United States.

That's absurd. So that's another way you win the case. Number three, the Fourteenth Amendment cannot be self-executing. In other words, there's been no charge of insurrection.

This, you had a three-day or four-day trial in Colorado. The charge wasn't, the trial wasn't, they had evidence about saying this wasn't an insurrection, but he wasn't charged with insurrection. No, he was not a party like that. And he wasn't even a party. I mean, he had to intervene. Yeah. We had to intervene as the GOP, as the Republican Party. We weren't even parties.

This was a self-done case between a friendly Secretary of State and crew. Go ahead. No, no, go ahead. I need to finish this.

Yeah. So here's what has to happen over the next several days, and this is what you need to understand. I want our audience to understand this. The first thing we have to do is follow a petition for writ of certiorari. Normally, you have 90 days to do that.

We have six. That is the request for review to the Supreme Court of the United States. So the first thing we have to do is convince, and I believe they will take it, for the Supreme Court of the United States to take the case. Then, because this is going to move so quickly, we've got to ask for expedited review.

And the reason we need expedited review is, while Colorado has stayed the enforcement of their decision taking Trump off the ballot, these other states may not do that. Number three, it needs to be put to rest for the American people before the primary start and the caucuses start on January. What is the first date, 15th? January 15th.

I was getting this question a lot on social media, and I wanted to wait to ask it to you. And it's if the Supreme Court does come down on the side of what we believe on our side, on President Trump's side, that this is wrong, but this is primary specific. Can they go to an opinion as far as to say, and by the way, don't try to bring this up in the general either? Correct.

Can they do that? Now, here will be the differential. And it won't happen before the election, so it won't happen. If he was somehow charged with insurrection somewhere and found guilty, that would be a different story. But he hasn't been. Jack Smith hasn't charged.

Jack Smith is barely hanging on to his case as it is. We're not even talking about that Supreme Court case. The January 6 issue of whether obstruction of Congress statute that they utilize interfering with an official act of Congress was interpreted so overbroad as to violate the First Amendment. And Judge Katz has said yes, it did. Big step down from insurrection. Big step down from insurrection. And that is at the Supreme Court of the United States now.

And believe me, Jack Smith's not happy about that. And then you've got the whole issue of the Presidential immunity, something we've argued at the Supreme Court for the same President. And that is pending. Now, we'll see if it goes back to the court of appeals there. But this case, this case out of Colorado is the case on election integrity and can impact the entire election because let me tell you what would happen. If this opinion stands, people are going to start saying, you know what, or if they let it linger, I like Trump, but I'm going to go with somebody else because I think it's too unstable.

I'm not sure my vote's going to count. That is the greatest form of election interference that you could possibly have. It'd be interesting because what we're picking up from both Republicans and Democrats is that they knew that this Colorado decision would boost Donald Trump in the polls. Now they're looking and saying, uh-oh, what if all these states did remove him from the ballot and he can't be the candidate because they want to run against Donald Trump. They think, the Democrat party still thinks that's their candidate to run against. And we know this from both the Republican, RNC and DNC, I'm not going to name names, but they think, the RNC thinks this is where the DNC wants. So they wanted a case like this, the DNC, to enrage the Trump base and get more votes to Donald Trump in the primary.

Here's what's interesting, Dad. When you just take out our cases that we're working on, there are an additional 32 states total looking at doing this. Some are looking at cases, some are looking at doing it through legislature, some are looking at doing it through secretary of state like California. So I mean, you've got our cases, you've got the legal cases, and then you've got the non-legal cases in attempt. I'm going to take Warren's call because I want to address this. Warren, go ahead, you're on the air.

Thanks for taking my call, guys, appreciate you. My question is, since he's never been adjudicated or anything for insurrection, can the red states take Biden off because he is being accused of high crimes and misdemeanors? Being accused of high crimes and misdemeanors is not a conviction for insurrection. So the answer is no.

And that's why the answer in Colorado also has to be no. Because that would work for Donald Trump, too. If you just took the impeachment part and you don't count the acquittal part, which, again, is the most important part, the impeachment's like the indictment and the acquittal is the end of the case. If you could do that, Donald Trump would be taken off.

So we don't want to go there. No, folks, listen, I want to be very clear here. We're dealing with, in the last 10 days of the year, the biggest election case in U.S. history ever. And I was part of the team on Bush v. Gore. Okay?

This dwarfs that. In an absurd interpretation of the 14th Amendment, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that President Trump is disqualified, we know that, from holding office a President. Our team, and we've got a full Supreme Court team on this, is dedicated to working right through the holidays.

We're going to try to file this midweek next week. So we're working right through the holiday, through Christmas, to get this case to the Supreme Court of the United States quickly. Because what's already happening is all these states are starting to do a pile-on. And now the pile-on is California and Maine. They're exploring their options to keep Trump off the ballot. And we're defending your right to vote. And Michigan, too. And that's an important state, not just in the primary, but in the general.

That's an outcome-determinative state. So, folks, this is the biggest fight on election voting and integrity in U.S. history. Period.

Bar none. Our fight is only possible because of people like you standing with us at the ACLJ. That's right. I mean, it's not a fight we wanted to pick, but it's a fight we are ready to use every resource possible we have at the ACLJ. And that's where you come in. This is the most important month of the year for us financially.

And now it's even that much more important. Because we're adding to our Supreme Court team as we speak. We're going to take this to the top Supreme Court advocates on our side of the aisle to make sure that you are able to choose the candidate of your choice. Maybe it's Donald Trump this time, but who knows into the future as well? We represent these state parties. They are worried about what happens in four years from now as well.

Does their leading candidate start getting taken off the ballot by blue state secretaries of state? So we need you to donate. There's two ways to do it. You can be part of our faith and freedom drive. Make a one-time donation. Maybe you want to make your large year-end donation and double the impact up to a million dollars. Or you want to become a recurring donor.

I just signed up to do that today. You pick up an amount that you know you can do automatically each month. Maybe it's $20.

Maybe it's $50. And when we're in a matching month, you will still get double the impact. So you go to ACLJ.org right now. And if you want to become a recurring donor, you're going to become an ACLJ champion. If you want to give that big year-end gift, this is the time to do it because we are adding to our team as we speak. Donate right now.

This is EmergencyFolks at ACLJ.org. So I know a lot of you are wondering, how is this going to work out? Because we're giving you dates that are right around the corner.

We know you're heading into Christmas weekend. And I want to tell you this. From the moment we heard this that night and I put out that video. And you were on your way to Washington, D.C. with very important meetings with Israeli officials, South Korean officials on another issue you care about deeply at the ACLJ.

Our team, we had Ben Sisney on yesterday. I mean, they're basically working 24 hours a day to make sure that we are filing exactly what we need to file with the Supreme Court. And we're also talking to people like Walter Weber on our team who are the top Supreme Court advocates and authors of the Supreme Court in the country. I mean, both sides would agree to that about Walter.

And Walter was coming to our team with all the hypotheticals about what we need to watch out for. So, Dad, the timeline right now is very important to our audience because they want to know kind of what are the options that the Supreme Court has. Well, first of all, and that's why you've got to have your priorities right.

So the first thing is what is the issue? The issue is every election and every voter's right to vote. Because this goes to the heart of our constitutional republic, your right to vote. And if state officials can remove candidates on their own accord or a judicial fiat can remove a candidate not based on what the Constitution actually says, but what they wish it would say, which is what's happened here. Well, then you're putting the entire country at risk. I mean, you are really, and that's why I think the Supreme Court has to jump in.

And look what's already happened. California, Maine, these other states are jumping on that bandwagon already. So the first thing we have to do, we represent the GOP of Colorado. The first thing we have to do is get the court to hear the case. It's called a petition for writ of certiorari. I'm trying to see if I have one here. I'll get one in for the next segment.

I think our team knows what that is. It's a white brief, it's printed, and it has the appendix, which is being worked on right now, and it has here's why you need to hear the case. And there's three reasons. First, the decision of the Colorado Supreme Court violates the right of the First Amendment and Freedom of Association for the Republican Party.

Because they get to put the candidate of their choice up. Number two, it violates itself the Constitution because section three of the Fourteenth Amendment doesn't get to automatically execute without an act of Congress or judicial determination. And number three, the President's not an officer of the United States under our constitutional framework.

But these are huge cases. But it has to happen really quickly because here's the problem. It is already having a chilling effect because there are people going to go to the ballot saying, you know, I was going to vote for Trump, but now I'm thinking maybe I'll go with somebody else or not even do it because I think the whole thing's corrupt.

Look what they did in Colorado. So we're going to ask for quick review. We may even ask for summary reversal. We're not sure about that. We're working through that now. We've got a team of lawyers on this right now, and I brought in some colleagues of ours that are Supreme Court practitioners, too, that are going to look at this and work with us on this.

We put our full resources, folks. I will declare this a judicial emergency. It is an emergency case. At the end of the year, we have to be filed by the end of the month at the latest. Before the end of the year. Well, look, the court's deadline is January 4th.

That's what the Colorado Supreme Court said. Well, I'd say, well, forget that. We've got to get it up before then. So that's why next week's critical. And that's because they'll start printing ballots about his name.

Yes. I mean, you realize if the court doesn't at least say we're taking the case by then or they give some kind of extension, right, Dad? They're going to start printing ballots because those military ballots got to get out very soon and overseas American ballots have to get out very soon.

They're going to start printing ballots without Donald Trump's name on it. Exactly. That takes Fred's call out of North Carolina. Hey, Fred, welcome to Secular.

You're on the air. Yes, sir. My question is simple. Can another state or an individual not sue the state of Colorado for violating the constitutional right by taking our choice away? No, the lawsuit, the litigation is to get this thing heard quickly.

I mean, could it possibly somebody could argue that it affects their right to vote. That will take way too long. You got no time here. When is the Colorado when's the primary? March 5th? I'm checking that state right now. And I think they print ballots in.

Yeah, I mean, they print ballots in January 5th or 10th. So look, no, we got to get the Supreme Court to act now. I did want to answer that, too, for Fred, because we did take that approach early on because we filed an amicus brief in Michigan representing the GOP there. But we also represent the GOP in Oklahoma, Colorado, West Virginia, Wyoming, Kansas, North Dakota, Wisconsin, Nebraska, Georgia, Delaware, Maine, Idaho, Rhode Island and Ohio. So in a sense, Fred, we are doing that as well. But with this case now coming to light, Michigan, by the way, that could be very important.

That court we're watching very closely. The Michigan Supreme Court, who was playing slow with this, might speed it up. So that amicus brief where we represent 15 additional state parties, Fred, that's kind of the way we did it this time. So that you are represented, even though it's not your state. It might not be North Carolina at that time, but it's enough states around the country, enough state parties around the country to say, listen, this affects us.

This does not just affect what you do in Michigan or Colorado or California. And by the way, Michigan, like you said, Dan, Colorado is a tough state for Republicans to win. It's an important primary state to get the nomination, though. And so is California. A lot of votes you get to win the primary. But Michigan is one of the top battleground states in the country. If he is excluded from the primary ballot in Michigan, his path to victory becomes very difficult, even though he could still win the primary with a few of these states taking him off. That's why I'm telling you, I'm telling our audience, it's the most important election case in U.S. history. It's the most important election interference case in U.S. history. Yeah, because you got to start looking at these states that are outcome determinants. Look, we got 10 days left in the year.

That's it. We're down to the last 10 days of the year and we've got the biggest election case in U.S. history. And out of nowhere.

To say we had it budgeted and planned for, the answer is we did not. Now, in an absurd misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment, the Colorado Supreme Court has allowed this to go forward. But other states are following suit.

So they rule that Trump is disqualified from holding office. Now you've got California and Maine exploring options. You've got these other states. We put that map up there for a moment. It's going around all over the country right now. We've got these cases.

You see them literally coast to coast. But here's the one from Colorado is the one that's headed to the Supreme Court and it's headed to the Supreme Court rapidly. And we represent a party in the case, the Colorado GOP. So we are defending them, but we are defending you and your right to vote, whether you're for Trump or not, it's irrelevant. What is important here is the candidate of your choice cannot simply be removed by the ballot.

By some bureaucrat. I think the great thing about how we're representing these state parties and why it's so important for you to donate now is that it's Donald Trump this time. But the next candidate that they think is the leading candidate, which they mentioned in the court case in Colorado. Not only is he the leading primary candidate, they said he's actually the leading candidate in the polls versus Joe Biden. They said that in the opinion.

In the opinion. So they're going to look and they say, if we could do this to Donald Trump, we're going to in four years, we're going to try to do this to the next leading Republican candidate who might not. It probably won't be. It won't be Donald Trump. And then the Republicans will do it to the Democrats because it'll be good for them.

Good for that. And we're going to lose the primary system and probably move to a caucus system. And let me tell you, it might work in Iowa. Let me tell you how a caucus system would be a mess in other states like California. Could you imagine? You couldn't do it.

I don't even know how you'd organize it. Yeah. So, folks, this is what it means. We need your support now more than ever. This is our faith and freedom driver at the year end. Any amount you donate is doubled.

We got a lot of large gifts came in today already. That really helps us right now, folks. So if you can support the work of the ACLJ, go to ACLJ.org. This is your right to vote for you, your kids and your grandkids. ACLJ.org. If you can make a large gift, great.

If you want to make a monthly gift, that's great too. You can become an ACLJ champion. But stand with us, folks. This is the most important election case in U.S. history. And it's going to probably all be resolved in a two-month period or less. We've got major attorneys both on the side of Trump, both on the side of the GOPs, but also Republican attorneys on the side of removing Trump. So we need your resources to get the best of the best. Donate today. ACLJ.org.

So we make sure you've got your right to vote. Keeping you informed and engaged. Now more than ever. This is Sekulow. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow.

All right, welcome back to Sekulow. My dad's joining us back in the studio today. Yesterday, Dad, you were in very important meetings in Washington, D.C., involving Israel. We know that's a key issue for so many of our donors and folks. We have not forgotten that.

I'm wearing it right now to bring them home. Now, on my neck, everywhere I go, every picture I take, because, again, these hostages, including American hostages, and you were working with the ambassadors from Israel on the next move there, very important. And we've got a huge team that is growing to protect your right to vote. And, Dad, I want you to walk through that, because we've got our great ACLJ team who are excellent Supreme Court advocates, including, you know, the Walter Webers of the world of our team. We've got the Ben Sisney workhorses have been working this case, Jane Raskin on this case. But we are expanding that team, which is right now happening, because this is all happening within six days or less, and that takes resources, because that is taking time. I mean, we've got attorneys that have been working 18 and 19 hours a day since that case came out that night. Yeah, so let me explain what we've done.

So the Supreme Court bars a small network of lawyers, really, and on both sides. So I'm going to friends of mine and saying, listen, I need your eyeballs on this cert petition. I need you to take a look at this with us.

So this is what a cert petition looks like. Do we have it on the screen? I'll hold it.

I mean, you'll see. It's fairly thick. I mean, it's a half an inch thick, and it's printed, and it moves quickly, and it said, the cert petition says, this is why you need to take the case. It starts with what's the question presented, and the question presented in our case will be three questions presented. The First Amendment rights of the Colorado GOP violated by Trump being taken off the ballot.

The second is the 14th Amendment Section 3, self-executing, without legislation, without a determination of an insurrection, and number three is, does the President constitute an officer within the meaning of the Constitution? Yeah, I was going to show people on the screen. So this portion right here, this is just the cert petition. Without all the appendices. It's probably 50 pages.

I think this one's about almost 40. And then you've got all the appendices. I mean, you add up to over 150 pages. But that's just the cert petition. It's 200 pages. Yeah.

So this one's being produced in the next week, less than a week. This is not the merits. No, this is just hear the case. So the first thing we have to do is get this filed. The petition for writ of certiorari. That will be filed next week. They will quickly respond.

Okay? We're going to ask for expedited review. So hopefully the court will do that, and we may need to do that.

I think that'll all come next week. We'll ask for expedited review. They'll respond. I think the court will issue a briefer schedule, assuming they take it. And then we have to get to marriage briefs.

We also will reply. They'll do a brief in opposition to certiorari. They'll say it's not worthy of certiorari. It should not be heard. Then we reply to that brief. Then the court meets in conference, and if four justices say we want to hear it, the case is granted certiorari, and expecting a case like this, it'll move on a very, very short timeframe, as it has to.

So what I want to say as we start this segment of the broadcast out, I want you to understand something. I worked on Bush versus Gore. I worked on Trump cases when he was in the White House as President that involved issues of Presidential immunity. The most important case we've ever handled is this one right here. Of any case involving the integrity of the electoral process in the United States, this is the most significant election case ever in the history of the United States of America. There is no case that is more important than this one.

It will affect everybody's right to vote and their right to vote for the candidate of their choice. So what does that mean? That means we need your help. Folks, this is critical. I'm trying to get this brief filed. I'll be honest. I'm trying to get this brief filed by midweek next week.

I know Christmas is Monday, and usually the day after Christmas, people are, we're working. I'd like to have this filed by Wednesday or Thursday next week. I want to get this into the Supreme Court quickly so they can start taking action. And we are going to be able to do that a lot easier if you give us the resources to get this team in place that is ready to go.

But we've got to have the financial resources. There's two ways to be part of our faith and freedom drive. First, become an ACLJ champion. Choose to make a recurring donation to the ACLJ, an amount you're comfortable with to donate automatically each month, $25 or $50. I did it this morning on my way into work, but I also made a larger donation to the ACLJ to get doubled for this month because of this case. So if you're thinking about a large end-of-year donation, I can't think of a better time if you care about your right to vote for the candidate of your choice, especially if that happens to be Donald Trump. Donate today at ACLJ.org so we protect your right to vote. All right, folks, we are joined by our secular senior analyst for both political and military affairs, Tulsi Gabbard, who has been a former member of Congress and a Presidential candidate. And Tulsi, I want to go right to you on this Colorado decision, which is now spreading rapidly across the country as states like California, the lieutenant governor saying to the secretary of state, hey, Colorado court did this.

Maybe you can do this without even having to go to court. We can take Trump off the ballot in California for the primary. And while California is a tough state for him to win in the general election, it's certainly very important if you are trying to win a primary to become the Republican nominee. And the world, we've seen it, I talked about it with Secretary Pompeo yesterday, is beginning to mock us because we condemn other countries for doing exactly this. We are. Yesterday, Tulsi, the State Department was putting out press releases condemning Maduro in Venezuela for not allowing other candidates on the ballot the same day this decision came out. I mean, Tulsi, this does not help our standing in the world.

It doesn't. But really, we should look at the effect that this is having right here at home. The fact that, again, we have many of these leaders who are cheerleading and celebrating the Colorado court's decision are the very same people who are preaching their commitment to defending democracy. The hypocrisy is just it's overwhelming. They're proving their arrogance and they're also proving their fear. They're showing through their actions and through their words how afraid they are of a free society, of a free American people who make our own decisions on who we want to elect to serve as our President and commander in chief. They're proving their arrogance and saying that, well, gosh, you know, the American people are too stupid. They don't know what the right and best decision is. So we're just going to take that power away from them and make it for ourselves because we're the only ones who care about democracy.

We're the only ones who care about freedom and whether they realize it or not, they're destroying our democracy in the process. So for me, as we look at California and we look at other states that are sure to pop up in the wake of this Colorado decision to file their own lawsuits. And as the lieutenant governor of California said, do everything possible. Look at every route possible to keep Trump off the ballot. It doesn't matter whether Trump is competitive in those states or not in a general election. The fundamental principle that's being violated here is these people in power are taking away our right to make the decision for ourselves as voters.

You know, RFK Jr. sent out a tweet yesterday that I think is very relevant. And I want to read it because I think I don't care what your political background is, folks. What he says is right.

And this is what he says. Every American should be troubled by the Colorado Supreme Court's decision to remove President Trump from the ballot. If Trump is kept out of the out of office through judicial fiat, rather than being defeated in a fair election, his supporters will never accept the results. This country will become ungovernable. And Tulsi, RFK Jr. is right, because when you take away the fundamental right to vote from people and you don't have due process, as the dissent in Colorado so eloquently pointed out, and you have this, you know, interpretation of the 14th Amendment, Section 3, that nobody buys, you know, a couple of academics think, oh, yeah, I think maybe it works, that we're taking it up for the Colorado GOP with three issues.

Freedom of speech. The President's not an officer under the Constitution, which he's not. And that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment is not self-executing. But what RFK Jr. has said here is right. It will create chaos in the political system.

Jordan shaking his head because it is unreal. People will feel like they have been cheated. Yes, undoubtedly. And it's it's it's kind of a fearful picture, a dark picture when we look at where this pass potentially leads. So, you know, they're undermining the rule of law. They're undermining the Constitution. They're undermining our democracy. And oh, by the way, I think it's important for us to point out the fact that this is not just something being driven by the Democrat leadership. There are people who call themselves Republicans who call themselves conservatives who are also cheerleading and championing, celebrating this decision by Colorado. So this this to me is a clear demarcation line between what I call the power elite and the rest of us.

They are more concerned for their power and holding on to it with all that they have, that they don't care that they are destroying our Democratic Republic in the process. No, I mean, Tulsi, they've even put their names out. I mean, I remember I worked on the Bush campaign in 2004. We had a legal department.

I would have to go to legal department, you know, to get approval for things. And Jason Tortensky is a great election lawyer. I think now he's with Holtzman Vogel. He put his name out there in the article early on when Cruz filed this suit agreeing with their position. These are very what they would call themselves conservative Republican attorneys in Washington, D.C. But the thing they don't like about Donald Trump is he doesn't need them. So he's not good for their business, whether it's their legal or slash lobbying business. And so they're very happy to go along with Cruz just to get him off the ballot and take him off the political battlefield.

And so you're getting the full swamp, the Republican swamp and the Democrat swamp. And Tulsi, I want to ask you, because you are serving in our military, I mean, and you're going all over the world, we ask men and women to serve and to protect these freedoms, not just for Americans, but for other people around the world. And this happens in our own country. It has to be a little bit demoralizing to our troops. And it might be the reason why our recruiting is down like it is right now. But both recruiting and retention, there's a direct connection there when we have service members across all branches of the military, people that I have served with and continue to serve alongside. We take this oath to support and defend the Constitution seriously, to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. And so when we see people, you know, in the judicial branch, we see legislators, we see people in the administration very directly undermining that Constitution. These are the very same people who have the power to make a decision about where we go to serve, about where we go into war, into conflict, putting our lives on the line. And so the implications of this are far reaching and they are deep. And they are impacting those who've taken that oath and I've had conversations with people wondering, why should I stay in?

What's the point? This is not the military that I joined. So, also, we appreciate your service to our country, appreciate you being part of our team. And thank you for your comments today. It really means a lot. Folks, we have got the challenge of challenges right here at the end of the year.

Look, the Israel situation came out of, it was not expected. We've been handling that. We've done that all day yesterday in Washington with the team of our ACLJ lawyers and government affairs office. Today, we're focusing again on the Supreme Court issue. We've got to get a cert petition filed before the Supreme Court of the United States.

I want to get it done next week. And this is where you come in. Your support allows us to do this. I'm bringing in a lot of outside lawyers who are looking at this. I've got a lot of people working on this. We've got a full ACLJ team on this. We've got our Supreme Court team and I've got others that are going to be looking at these drafts as it goes. This is the most important election case of our lifetime.

Put the camera on me for a second. I want to talk to the people here. Folks, this case is perhaps, and I will say this, this is the most important Supreme Court case we have ever taken. And that includes some very important cases.

And I say that because in the United States of America, if we lose the right to vote, we have lost our constitutional republic. So if you care about the country, I want you to be praying for our team, praying for the lawyers working on these cases right through the holidays and support the work of the American Center for Law and Justice as generously as you can. We've gotten a lot of big gifts came in today.

A lot of large gifts came in today and we're also getting a lot of regular gifts as well, which is the backbone of the ACLJ. We really encourage you to do it. And we need you today because this is key in this final just six days. We've got to add to our team. We already added to our team for this case.

We need additional members for our team to get the best of the best cert petition written. And we know we can do that at the ACLJ and then start preparing for the next steps because of the onslaught. I mean, we said emergency because it's not just Colorado. If it was just Colorado in this one state, I think you'd say, we'd file all of our work, we'd go to the Supreme Court, we'd feel very confident. Now that you're seeing these states like Michigan wanting to rush their Michigan Supreme Court case up, now you're starting to see California say, Secretary of State, just do it on your own accord by fiat.

You don't even need a court case. I mean, this could impact not just the ability for Donald Trump to win the primary because if you did enough of these, it'd be tough to win the primary. But even if it didn't do that, it could make it impossible for him to win the general election even if he did win the primary in enough states to get the Republican nomination. So you see the twofold crisis he's here.

And it is not just Democrats. Like Tulsi said, I will go through when we come back the other campaigns who are funding this work. And it might be surprising to some people and it might also change where you're thinking about who to vote for. But I need you right now because I want you to be able to vote for the candidate of your choice, whether it's Donald Trump or somebody else. And I want you to be able to do that in the future and my kids to be able to do that in the future. We can put this to rest now if we get your financial support and beat this back once and for all at the US Supreme Court. Donate today two ways. Make a big donation, we'll match it.

Or become an ACLJ champion, recurring donation, it will match this month and you'll make that donation each month. Do it today, ACLJ.org. It's an emergency.

All right folks, I do want to take some of your phone calls as well. People have got questions and I understand it because this is kind of, it's not unheard of to rush a case. I mean, we've seen with Bush versus Gore, we've seen it with a number of cases, but we thought like with Roe versus Wade, that that was going to be the craziest term in the court for awhile.

I think this term takes it up a whole notch because you got an abortion case. Yeah, and you got two, three cases that could impact an election. You got January 6th case, you got the Donald Trump on the ballot case. And Presidential immunity.

And immunity. And the biggest one is the taking them off the ballot. Yes, because that affects all of us in every state very soon in many states.

So I mean just the next three months in half the country, but I want to take your phone calls. I actually think this case is going to be up and over probably in an eight week period. And that includes possible oral argument. And what I hope for is that it also closes the door to these general election challenges.

I know it's possible that it doesn't, but that we don't have to fight it out again after he wins the primary. This is the next move we're filing, folks, next week, the petition for certiorari. This is what it looks like. All right, let's go ahead and take a look. It's not two pages.

No, it's with the attachments it's 150. You got to make a good case still to the Supreme Court. I mean... 150 pages. And let's take some calls. And then I want to get into some more of this info about the cabal behind this, like Tulsi was talking about. Don't just think this is out of extreme liberal Democrats doing this. It's not.

It's plenty of DC Republicans as well, and a lot of candidates who are using those attorneys to do this. Let's go in order now. Page in South Carolina on line three. That's the third state in the country that will vote in the primary. Page, welcome to Sekulow. You're on the air.

Good afternoon, fellows. My question is, would the Supreme Court take this opportunity to maybe address the other three dangerous cases that Trump has, the DC case, the Florida case, and the Georgia case? Okay, they're independent, but here's what's likely going to happen. The Georgia case is totally separate from the state court system. The January 6th case, which was not brought by President Trump, but rather one of the other protesters, the Supreme Court has granted review, and everybody's been surprised. It was a two to one decision on whether the provision saying that you obstructed an official act of Congress wasn't interpreted so broadly as to violate the First Amendment. We're filing a brief in that case. The court has already agreed to hear that one. Jack Smith is trying to get the Supreme Court to hear the Presidential immunity case because that case is next set to go to the Court of Appeals in normal course. But Jack Smith wants it to be before the election.

You understand what's going on here. They are doing everything they can to thwart this process, this electoral process. And in the middle of it, you got the Colorado Supreme Court. Now we're having to take that to the Supreme Court in the United States on behalf of the Colorado Republican Party because they're interfering with everybody's right to vote. That is the most important election case in our history, and it is certainly the most important election case of this year, but in the US history. Folks, I want you to be part of that history. Support the work of the ACLJ.

Here's why. I'm putting together, we have a great team, but we're bringing in some outside lawyers too. This case is everything for the electoral process. I've litigated for 40 years, four decades, almost five decades before the Supreme Court of the United States.

This is it, folks. This is the biggest case we've ever handled. In a sense, people say, is it as big as the overturning of Roe versus Wade, bigger your right to vote? Because then you don't even get into those other issues. They eliminate your right to vote and let these bureaucrats just remove people from the ballot because they don't like them. Guess who wouldn't have gotten appointed to the US Supreme Court?

The three Supreme Court justices that were necessary to overturn Roe versus Wade. So this is the fundamental case. Now, Will was telling us that our folks in our finance group were telling us that we've got a lot of major gifts came in today, large donations. We appreciate that. If you can make a large gift to the ACLJ, it's going to be double like Jordan set up to a million dollars total. So that's great. But let me say this also, very important.

If it's $20 a month or if it's $30 one time or whatever it is, all of that makes a difference. Support the work at the ACLJ at ACLJ.org. Let's take another phone call. Yeah. I want to go to, uh, let me, let me go to Steve in New York on line six or line five.

Hey Steve. Hey, uh, my concern is based on what the US Supreme Court did in 2020 that the opposition to what the left did in Colorado is introduces too much complexity and it's too deferential and it just makes it very easy for the other side to obfuscate the way they did. Uh, they didn't address the main point, which was, there was nothing insurrectional. He didn't tell people to turn over tables, uh, did say that the dissent in the opinion said that there was no trial on insurrection process. There was no due process. That's what they went. So Steve, when they say there was no due process, that's what they mean, but there's not even been a charge of insurrection by the federal government, by the department of justice here.

You know, Jack Smith would have brought it if he thought he could win it a hundred percent and he brings the craziest charges he can and he couldn't bring that one. Yeah. So no, this is, this is pure legal overreach impacting everybody in the United States that's able to vote.

Let me tell you when it started. It's Washington Post, September 12th of this year, Republican election lawyer with ties to three of former President Donald Trump's GOP primary opponents has joined a field of individuals and groups exploring whether the former President can be kept off the ballot for his role in what they call formatting the violent attack on the U S Capitol on January 6th. Jason Torchinsky, who was a top attorney with, when I worked at the Bush campaign, he was one of our top attorneys, same office with me. He's now a partner with the Virginia law firm of Holtzman Vogel and he participated in this. So I'm just reading it verbatim from Washington Post in recent days, he's initiated conversations about the idea of trying to disqualify Trump with a range of figures, including a Democrat secretary of state, fellow election lawyers, a retired federal judge and, and others. Then it goes on to say, by the way, who's he been involved with? His firm and Torchinsky have done legal work for the campaigns of former New Jersey governor Chris Christie, Vivek Ramaswamy, as well as never back down the political action committee promoting the Presidential campaign of Florida governor Ron DeSantis. So when you saw all of them yesterday, it didn't say, I will say it did not say anything about Nikki Haley in this, but when you saw the other three, like Chris Christie and Ramaswamy saying he'll quit, you know, if, if Donald Trump is taken off the ballot and you saw Ron DeSantis condemn it, they are working with the law firm that started this ball rolling. So this is, this is the deep Washington that you got to remember. It's like this, when I saw this, I, I filed it away in my head, dad, cause I said at some point this is going to be important to point out to our audience that Chris Christie, Ramaswamy and DeSantis started the funding of this effort along with Crewe. All right folks.

I hope you understand that clearly. So now what we're talking about is your right to vote and your right to vote now best is going to vest with the Supreme Court of the United States. And we have to convince five justices of the Supreme Court that what Colorado did is wrong and the stakes could not be higher and the issues could not be more significant and complex. They're complex issues. Not a lot of law in the 14th amendment section three, there hasn't been a judicial interpretation of is the President an officer for the purpose of the constitution?

I think it's clear he's not, but then the issue of the first amendment rights, the freedom of association for the Republican party, these are huge issues. So folks, here's what we need you to do. We've got 10 days left in the month.

We did not expect this case. We've got our team working. I'm bringing in other lawyers. Your support for the ACLJ is going to make a huge difference. If you can donate $10,000, thank you. If you can donate $10, thank you, it'll be doubled. And also, and this is important for you to understand, if you can donate monthly, become an ACLJ champion, which helps us get through these kinds of crises when you've got these major cases. So what I need you to do right now is make the most generous gift you can to the American Center for Law and Justice as we end the year with now the biggest Supreme Court case we have ever had. I have represented Presidents before the Supreme Court of the United States, including President Trump. And this case is more important than that. It affects him, but it affects you and me more directly than him.

Yeah. And it affects me, who I get to vote for in the next election, your kids in the next election, to be able to choose the candidate of their choice. I want you to do one of two things. Make a big year in donation and have it doubled through our faith and freedom drive, or become an ACLJ champion, choose a recurring amount, make that donation online at ACLJ.org. This is a judicial emergency, donate today.