BOOM! Judge Rejects Trump Ballot Eligibility Challenge

(Congress Report) – Radical progressives are really going all out to try and prevent former President Donald Trump from being the Republican Party presidential nominee who will go toe-to-toe with President Joe Biden — as of now — for the White House. Liberal Democrats have thrown over 90 charges at him in four different indictments over the last year. What’s more, they previously tried to have Trump impeached and removed from office twice during his administration and are now attempting to have his name removed from the ballot in several states.

They are afraid of him. Why? Because Trump has a track record of doing what he says he’s going to do. And part of what he’s going to do is dismantle the deep state element within the Justice Department, neutralizing one of the best weapons the left currently has at their disposal.

However, as The Western Journal is reporting, efforts to scrub his name from the primary ballot are not going well. U.S. District Court Judge Gloria M. Navarro smacked down a lawsuit filed by John Anthony Castro to get the former president’s name removed from the ballot in Nevada. Judge Navarro did so without even talking about the merit of the suit’s claim: The allegation that Trump is banned from running for public office due to Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

The real kicker, which is probably causing leftists to blow steam out of their ears, is that Navarro is an Obama appointee. Ah, the fresh sting of betrayal, right? No, it’s not betrayal. It’s a judge doing her actual job, and that is quite refreshing.

“This is a politically charged question of significant interest to the American public,” the ruling went on to say.

“The ruling said Castro claims he would be damaged by Trump’s candidacy because he will be appearing on Nevada’s primary ballot, adding ‘the Court finds that Castro lacks standing, and the Court therefore lacks jurisdiction to hear this case,'” the report says.

“In rejecting his political competitor standing argument, courts have found that Castro improperly manufactured his standing merely to file this lawsuit,” the ruling continues.

The ruling from Navarro included a quote from New Hampshire that also ruled against Castro saying, “evidence indicates that Castro is creating his own injury in order to manufacture standing to challenge Trump’s eligibility to run for president. Indeed, by his own admission, Castro declared as a candidate and paid the filing fee to show the impermissibility of Trump’s presidency.”

The judge’s ruling pointed out that, “In an Associated Press article that Castro invited the courts to consider, Castro is quoted as stating, ‘I’m not going to lie and pretend my candidacy is anything more than trying to enforce the United States Constitution, and that’s what I’m here to do.’”

Furthermore, it also stated that the two men aren’t even competing due to Castro running in the Nevada Republican primary race, while Trump is running in a GOP caucus and not the primary.

“Because Castro does not have standing to challenge Trump’s eligibility to run for president, the Court does not have jurisdiction to rule on the merits of this case,” the ruling disclosed.

Steven Cheung, a representative for the Trump campaign, proclaimed, “dismissal of another bogus, bad-faith, Crooked Joe Biden-engineered attempt to deprive Americans as a whole, and the voters of Nevada specifically, of their right to vote for the candidate of their choice is not only a victory for President Trump, but a victory for all Americans and the people of Nevada,” according to a piece published by Fox News.

“President Trump remains undefeated in federal court against these cynical efforts to interfere in the 2024 election. Courts in eleven states have now dismissed similar, pathetic, 14th Amendment ballot cases,” Cheung noted.

“Make no mistake, each and every one of these ‘ballot-challenges’ are blatant attempts to steal the election for Crooked Joe Biden and disenfranchise over 100 million American voters,” he added.

“President Trump is the leading candidate for not only the Republican primary, but the general election and his opponents are desperate. Rest assured that he will fight each and every one of these disgraceful attacks on American democracy, he will win, and we will all Make America Great Again,” the campaign representative remarked.

Just last month, the Colorado Supreme Court decided to boot Trump from the primary ballot, again, citing the 14th Amendment. This decision has been appealed and SCOTUS is set to hear the case on Feb. 8.

Copyright 2024.


  1. The Constitution states it plainly that people having pledged to uphold the federal Constitution but commit insurrection are not eligible to hold office. At this time there are valid arguments that insurrectionists may run for office but not enter into those offices. There is a weak argument that the ‘ex-president’ was not an officer under the language of the Constitution. Weaker still is Trump’s argument that the oath he took did not state upholding the document so is invalid under Article 5’s language.
    Then we have the political arguments that judges reject lawsuits for plaintiffs that have no standing; others, state there is no ‘harm’ to fellow candidates. And, Trump appointed judges are beholden to him and won’t hear or uphold cases against their benefactor. None of these obtains if you simply read the language written to keep post-Civil War secessionists or insurrectionists from getting back into office, and that applies today to January 6th insurrection of Trump and hundreds of followers who are now in jail for (guess what?) insurrection following Trump’s orders.
    None of this is vindictive, stealing elections, an attack on democracy, any form of disgraceful conduct, bad-conduct, pathetic or deprives anyone of a legitimate vote. Those are desperate words from Trump backers who see more or less clearly that Trump led an insurrection to prevent Joe Biden’s votes from being certified on 1/6, facts proven in court that he’s an insurrectionist even though the man himself was not indicted or convicted, only indicated by convicted insurrectionists as their leader. No Constitutional language states that Trump must first be convicted of insurrection as Special Council attorney Jack Smith has pursued the issues with Trump or State judges, so far, have followed due process and rules of law to entertain court cases. Dismissal of this case doesn’t mean Trump will be on every state ballot in November. And it would take only a few states to deny him election.

  2. I don’t care what anyone have to say ‘bout Trump, no one has proven anything about him, and yet about Biden all those things he promised? where are they? the country is in a very bad shape and the only one can put this country back together is Donald Trump, whether some people likes it or not Vote Donald Trump 2024, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN ❤️❤️❤️❤️🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

  3. What I see here is a profound deterioration of “the character of the Union.” Washington advised against this phenomenom ever happening, for it would lead to the end of the Union. And, friends, it is already happening; in fact, I believe it is impossible to turn it around. We can only circumvent it by creating a New Union with true Patriots. Like those found in the Red States.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here