Supreme Court Declines to Hear Appeal of Former New Mexico County Commissioner Removed from Office due to Involvement in January 6, 2021 Capitol Riot
On Monday, the Supreme Court declined to hear the appeal of a former New Mexico county commissioner, Couy Griffin, who was removed from office due to his role in the January 6, 2021 US Capitol riot. With this decision, Griffin’s removal from office will stand.
First Elected Official to Be Booted due to the 14th Amendment’s “Insurrectionist Ban”
Griffin, the founder of Cowboys for Trump and a convicted Capitol rioter, was removed from office in 2022. His ousting marked the first time an elected official was expelled under the 14th Amendment’s “insurrectionist ban” as a result of the US Capitol riot.
The Significance of the Supreme Court’s Decision
The Supreme Court’s decision not to take up Griffin’s case means that the lower court ruling, which barred him from holding public office, will remain in effect. This decision sets a crucial precedent regarding the application of the 14th Amendment to elected officials who have participated in insurrectionist activities.
Background: The Capitol Riot and the 14th Amendment’s “Insurrectionist Ban”
The January 6, 2021 US Capitol riot was an unprecedented event in American history. A mob of Trump supporters stormed the Capitol building with the intent to disrupt the certification of the 2020 presidential election results. Several elected officials, including Griffin, were among those who participated in the riot.
Following this incident, Section 3 of the 14th Amendment was invoked to bar individuals who had engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States from holding public office. The “insurrectionist ban” has not been used extensively since Reconstruction, and its application to modern political circumstances remains uncertain.
Implications of the Decision for Future Cases
The Supreme Court’s refusal to hear Griffin’s appeal establishes a precedent for how future cases involving the application of the 14th Amendment’s “insurrectionist ban” will be treated. This decision underscores the importance of holding accountable individuals who engage in insurrectionist activities, particularly those who hold public office.
It also sends a clear message that such actions will not be tolerated and that the principles of democracy and the rule of law must be upheld, regardless of political affiliations.
Conclusion: A Landmark Decision for American Democracy
The Supreme Court’s decision to let stand the removal of Couy Griffin from office is a significant milestone in American democracy. It sets an important precedent for how the 14th Amendment’s “insurrectionist ban” will be applied in future cases and reinforces the importance of upholding democratic norms and the rule of law.
This landmark decision underscores that elected officials, regardless of their political affiliations, cannot engage in insurrectionist activities without consequences and that they will be held accountable for their actions.