Washington Judge Orders Printing of Primary Ballots With Trump Included

Republican presidential candidate former President Donald Trump looks on during a campaign rally at the Atkinson Country Club in Atkinson, N.H., on Jan. 16, 2024. Brandon Bell/Getty Images

Former President Donald Trump will appear on the primary ballot in Washington state following an order from Thurston County Superior Court Judge Mary Sue Wilson.

Judge Wilson dismissed the challenge to President Trump’s eligibility on Thursday, after Kitsap County Superior Court Judge Jeffrey Bassett dismissed the same challenge on Tuesday, saying the petition should have been brought in Thurston County, which encompasses the state capital.

Washington Secretary of State Steve Hobbs praised the ruling.

“I am grateful that Judge Wilson ruled in such a timely and well-considered fashion, and that she recognized that I and my staff have been working in full compliance with state law governing the Presidential Primary,” he stated. “We will continue working with our partners in county elections offices to get all the necessary materials for this election to every Washington voter.”

The state primary will be held March 12, and officials have a Jan. 27 deadline to print ballots, which will first be mailed to overseas and military voters.

The Trump Campaign praised the decision as well.

“Washington’s decision mirrors similar decisions in over a dozen federal courts as well as state courts in Michigan, Minnesota and Oregon,” stated campaign spokesman Steven Cheung. “Although the judge made the correct decision in this matter, we remain steadfast in our opposition to these cases, which are orchestrated by Democrat Party allies of failed president Crooked Joe Biden and we resolve to fight any and all remaining bad-faith, election-interfering sham cases wherever they reside.”

Eight Kitsap County voters had filed the petition on Jan. 10, a day after the secretary announced the primary candidate lists.

The Democratic Party candidates are President Joe Biden, Dean Phillips, and Marianne Williamson. The Republican Party candidates are President Trump, Ron DeSantis, Nikki Haley, Vivek Ramaswamy, and Chris Christie.

The petitioners argued that President Trump was ineligible as a candidate under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, because Jan. 6, 2021, constituted an “insurrection.” Under the election statute in the complaint, a hearing was promptly scheduled.

According to the Seattle Times, the petitioners had initially argued their case without legal counsel and filed a brief, one-paragraph complaint. But during the Thursday hearing, an attorney represented the group, arguing that the court should follow Colorado’s disqualification of President Trump.

“The Washington statutes are not identical to the Colorado statutes but they should be given their plain sense meaning,” attorney David Vogel said, the Seattle Times reported. “It is a wrongful act to put a person who is constitutionally disqualified by the 14th Amendment on our state ballots.”

Nationwide Challenges

Dozens of these kinds of challenges have been brought in jurisdictions all across the country the past several months and continue to be filed, though they have largely been unsuccessful.

Experts are expecting the matter to ultimately be settled by the U.S. Supreme Court, which on Jan. 5 agreed to hear a related appeal filed by President Trump after the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that he was disqualified under the Civil War-era statute. Some 40 amici briefs, including those filed by a group of 179 members of Congress and a group of 102 Colorado citizens, have been submitted, urging the high court to settle the matter definitively.

Recent rulings have highlighted the imminent decision by the Supreme Court.

In Maine, a court stayed the state secretary’s decision to disqualify President Trump as a candidate, ordering her to await the high court’s decision and act accordingly within 30 days of that ruling.

“It is likely—although admittedly, not certain—that [Trump v. Anderson] will resolve many questions raised in this appeal,” the Maine order reads. “The Court does not share the Secretary’s confidence about the likelihood of the Supreme Court resolving Anderson only on Colorado-specific points of law.”

The Oregon Supreme Court similarly declined to hear an eligibility challenge citing the Supreme Court case.

“Because a decision by the United States Supreme Court regarding the Fourteenth Amendment issue may resolve one or more contentions that relators make in the Oregon proceeding, the Oregon Supreme Court denied their petition for mandamus,” the order reads.

The Oregon Supreme Court noted that it was declining to take the case “for now” and it was only dismissed without prejudice, meaning local voters could file another petition should the Supreme Court leave issues unresolved for Oregon’s elections.