A Democratic-backed bill in Hawaii, SB 2392, has gained momentum in the state legislature, raising the possibility of banning former President Trump from the ballot due to his alleged role in inciting the January 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol.
The bill, introduced by Democrat Sen. Karl Rhoads, does not explicitly name Trump but seeks to exclude any candidate disqualified under various constitutional provisions, Fox News Digital reports.
The proposed legislation aims to align with Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, Article XVI, Section 3 of the Hawaii State Constitution, or other relevant constitutional or statutory provisions. While not specifically targeting Trump, the bill mirrors actions taken by Maine’s Democratic Secretary of State and Colorado’s Supreme Court, both of which cited an insurrection clause to bar Trump from their state ballots.
The Hawaii bill goes further by attempting to prevent electors from voting for any presidential or vice-presidential nominee disqualified under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, either by a federal court or the state supreme court in an election contest. Additionally, it seeks to bar disqualified individuals from appearing on party ballots for presidential and vice-presidential nominees.
“The legislature finds that citizens of this State have the right to expect that public servants be people of integrity, and not people who have committed actions that threaten democracy or undermine the vote of the people,” the bill says. “Any challenge to the inclusion or exclusion of any candidate on a ballot issued by the chief election officer or clerk shall be in writing and, no later than the fifty-seventh day prior to the general election, shall be filed with the appropriate district court; provided that for any challenge to the inclusion or exclusion of a presidential candidate on a general election ballot, the appropriate district court shall be the district court of the first circuit. The challenge shall provide notice in a summary manner of the grounds that give rise to the complaint. No later than the fifty-fourth day prior to the general election, the district court shall hold a hearing regarding the challenge. The district court shall assess the validity of the complaint and shall issue findings of fact and conclusions of law no later than the fifty-third day prior to the general election. The party filing the challenge shall have the burden to sustain the challenge by a preponderance of the evidence, unless a higher burden is required by constitutional law.”
The bill justifies its purpose by emphasizing the expectation that public servants should be people of integrity and not individuals who have undermined democracy. It outlines a process for challenging the inclusion or exclusion of any candidate on a ballot, requiring written challenges filed with the district court no later than 57 days prior to the general election.
The Hawaii bill passed its first reading on Monday. The broader context includes similar efforts in other states like Maine, where Secretary of State Shenna Bellows faces legal challenges in her decision to remove Trump from the ballot until the U.S. Supreme Court rules on a comparable case in Colorado.
With Super Tuesday approaching and the U.S. Supreme Court set to hear arguments on the Colorado case on Feb. 8, the timeline becomes crucial. Tight deadlines might prevent reissuing rulings on Trump’s ballot status and filing additional appeals before Election Day.
Lawsuits in other states, including Minnesota, Michigan, Arizona, and Oregon, have been dismissed on procedural grounds, but challenges in Illinois are reportedly still under consideration.
