×

Federal judge dismisses lawsuit to keep Trump off West Virginia ballot

In this Aug. 21, 2018 file photo, President Donald Trump pauses while speaking during a in Charleston, W.Va. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

CHARLESTON – Unlike in Colorado, a case brought in federal court to keep former Republican president Donald Trump off of the primary and general election ballots in West Virginia was dismissed.

In a memorandum opinion and order released Thursday evening, U.S. District Judge Irene C. Berger granted motions made by attorneys for Trump, Secretary of State Mac Warner, and the West Virginia Republican Party to dismiss a lawsuit brought in September by Texas resident and write-in presidential candidate John Anthony Castro.

Berger also ordered that Castro’s case be dismissed without prejudice, which would allow Castro to possibly file the case again during the candidate filing period in West Virginia beginning Monday, Jan. 8, through Saturday, Jan. 27.

“This is a big win for the integrity of our elections,” said Attorney General Patrick Morrisey in a statement Thursday evening. “This lawsuit was frivolous to begin with and without merit – it had no basis in either law or fact. Any eligible candidate has the right to be on the ballot unless legally disqualified, and we will defend the laws of West Virginia and the right of voters and candidates to the fullest.”

Castro was seeking a federal court order prohibiting Trump from being placed on the 2024 Republican primary ballot in West Virginia, arguing that the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prevents Trump from holding future federal offices.

Castro believes that Trump’s words and actions leading up to the certification of the 2020 presidential election by Congress on Jan. 6, 2021, helped fuel a riot at the U.S. Capitol by Trump supporters attempting to stop the certification of President Joe Biden.

The lawsuit, filed Sept. 7 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, is one of two dozen lawsuits filed by Castro in other states attempting to block Trump’s ballot access. Castro claimed that allowing Trump on West Virginia’s ballot next year will harm Castro’s ability to campaign and fundraise, though Castro has reported no donations to date to the Federal Election Commission.

In her memorandum opinion, Berger said that Castro’s lawsuit was disingenuous, considering that there were no signs that Castro had actively campaigned for president in West Virginia or had any campaign presence in the state at all.

“The evidence establishes that he has no campaign offices, staff, or advertising in West Virginia, does not appear in polling, has little name recognition among West Virginia Republican primary voters, and has extremely minimal campaign funds, vastly insufficient to run an actual campaign,” Berger wrote. “If there were any question as to whether the allegations in the complaint are sufficient to overcome a facial challenge, the evidentiary submissions remove any doubt that Mr. Castro’s purported ‘campaign’ exists as a vehicle for pursuing litigation, not votes.”

Berger cited admissions by Castro in a similar lawsuit in New Hampshire where Castro admitted that he had no campaign activities beyond filing lawsuits to block Trump from the ballots in multiple states. Beyond that, Berger said Castro was unable to show how Trump being on the ballot would harm his write-in presidential campaign.

“The law is not well-developed with respect to standing based on political competition,” Berger wrote. “However, the Court finds that Mr. Castro’s complaint relied on supposition and speculation: that if Mr. Trump were removed from the ballot, his voters and contributors would default to other candidates, including Mr. Castro. But he supplies no specifics to support the conclusion that any Trump voters would become Castro voters if his suit was successful.”

Berger’s ruling is the opposite of a ruling made Tuesday by the Colorado Supreme Court, which decided that Trump was ineligible for the Colorado primary ballot because of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which states that “No person shall … hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath … to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”

According to Politico, the Colorado Republican Party and Trump plan to appeal the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision to the U.S. Supreme Court and seek an expedited ruling. The ruling has been stayed pending appeal.

Steven Allen Adams can be reached at sadams@newsandsentinel.com