Utah Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson, the state’s top elections official, says the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision to remove Donald Trump from the 2024 primary election there will not affect the nominating process in the Beehive State — at least for now.
“The short answer is it doesn’t have any effect — at least short term — on how we are operating in our state,” Henderson said in a video posted to X on Tuesday evening, “because the state of Utah allows parties to decide whether or not they’ll have a presidential primary.”
On Tuesday, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that Trump was constitutionally disqualified in the primary, citing his “speech inciting the crowd that breached the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021,″ according to The Denver Post.
Henderson went on to explain that the Utah Republican Party will host a presidential caucus, not a primary, on March 5, 2024. This means GOP delegates will meet on Super Tuesday to nominate a Republican presidential candidate in lieu of GOP voters casting ballots.
Each party, she said, is required to submit their presidential and vice presidential nominees to the lieutenant governor’s office by Aug. 31, 2024.
“I assume by then we’ll have some more clarity on this issue,” Henderson said. “But for now, the Colorado ruling has no impact — at least at the moment — on how we are going to be operating in the near future.”
Gov. Spencer Cox said in his monthly news conference Wednesday he was disappointed with Colorado’s decision to disqualify Trump.
“It’s very unlikely that this would happen in Utah. I think it’s very unlikely that the [U.S.] Supreme Court will uphold that Colorado decision. I hope it’s something that they’ll take up very quickly so that we can get that settled,” Cox said.
Trump’s disqualification in Colorado hinges on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which bars anyone who participates in a rebellion against the government of the United States from holding public office. Cox said Wednesday he doubted that part of the 14th Amendment, drafted after the Civil War, would apply to Trump in this case.
“We’ve never had a case like this one. I don’t think it’s anything like the Civil War cases. When you have a literal civil war and secession from the Union, we all know what that meant. Whether the events of January 6 qualify in this case or not, it’s not as clear,” Cox argued.
Cox said voters and not the courts should ultimately judge whether Trump should occupy the White House again.
“I’ve said many times that Donald Trump did some good things as president. I thought he did some terrible things as president. I don’t think he should be president again. I really don’t. But I hope the people of the United States will figure that out and can make those decisions,” Cox said.