Skip to main content
We may receive compensation from affiliate partners for some links on this site. Read our full Disclosure here.

Victory! Yet Another 14th Amendment Challenge To President Trump Tossed By Judge!


Official portrait of President Donald J. Trump, Friday, October 6, 2017. (Official White House photo by Shealah Craighead)

Yet another 14th Amendment challenge against the 45th President has been neutralized.

A lawsuit brought forward by long-shot Presidential candidate John Anthony Castro, seeking to remove President Trump from the 2024 ballot in New Mexico, has been tossed by a judge.

WLTR recently reported that Castro was arrested and charged with 33 counts of falsifying tax documents. Castro is the owner of a virtual tax-prep business.

Castro is also responsible for filing 14th Amendment challenges in 26 states other than New Mexico.

ADVERTISEMENT

Hopefully, his arrest and indictment will lead to the rest of these bogus lawsuits being dropped in each of these other states. Here’s more on the story:

The Epoch Times provided more details:

Mr. Castro’s lawsuit in New Mexico was one of many he filed in other states, with Judge Garcia noting in an opinion that, along with the latest dismissal, “thus far, Castro’s efforts have not proven fruitful.”

“District courts across the country have—without exception—dismissed nearly identical suits filed by Castro for lack of standing,” he added.

One user provided a list of current states with unresolved 14th Amendment challenges: “Additional challenges to Trump’s ballot eligibility remain unresolved in 16 states: California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Alaska, Wisconsin, Illinois, Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, New York, Massachusetts, Vermont New Hampshire.”

Breitbart presented a portion of the judge’s ruling:

“In an effort to establish a cognizable interest for purposes of Article III, Castro invokes the theory of “political competitor standing,”… which is the notion that “a candidate or his political party has standing to challenge the inclusion of an allegedly ineligible rival on the ballot, on the theory that doing so hurts the candidate’s or party’s own chances of prevailing in the election.”…

For a plaintiff to demonstrate injury as a political competitor, they must show that they “have a chance of prevailing in the election” because the underlying injury is the potential loss of the election.”



 

Join the conversation!

Please share your thoughts about this article below. We value your opinions, and would love to see you add to the discussion!

Leave a comment
Thanks for sharing!