On the first morning of a weeklong hearing to determine if Donald Trump is constitutionally ineligible to appear on Colorado’s 2024 presidential primary ballot, the judge overseeing the case rejected Trump’s request to recuse herself over a $100 political contribution she made prior to taking the bench.
Scott Gessler, an attorney for Trump, “reluctantly” filed a motion on Saturday seeking Denver District Court Judge Sarah B. Wallace’s recusal. Gessler indicated he only learned on Oct. 27 that, prior to her appointment as a judge, Wallace made a $100 contribution to the Colorado Turnout Project.
“Its website proudly proclaims that the group was formed ‘shortly after Colorado Republicans refused to condemn the political extremists who stormed the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021,’” Gessler wrote. “A contribution to the Colorado Turnout Project shows support for the view that January 6, 2021, constituted an ‘insurrection.’”
One of the key issues in the case is whether Trump is disqualified from seeking the presidency under the 14th Amendment, which bars federal and state officials from holding office if they engaged in an insurrection against the United States.
At the beginning of the hearing on Monday, Wallace denied Trump’s motion to recuse, while distancing herself from the Colorado Turnout Project and its views on the Jan. 6 Capitol attack.
“I do not dispute that on (October 15, 2022), prior to taking the bench, I apparently made a $100 contribution to the Colorado Turnout Project. That being said, prior to yesterday, I was not cognizant of this organization or its mission,” she said. “It has always been my practice, whether I was entirely successful or not, to make contributions to individuals, not PACs (political action committees).”
“I can assure all of the litigants that prior to the start of this litigation and to this day, I have formed no opinion whether the events of Jan. 6 constituted an insurrection,” Wallace continued, or whether Trump “engaged in an insurrection or, for that matter, any of the issues that need to be decided in this hearing.”
She did not address the standard for recusal in the code of judicial conduct, which directs recusal when a judge’s impartiality “might reasonably be questioned.” The Colorado Supreme Court has held that even if a judge’s involvement creates an appearance of impropriety, it will only question the outcome on appeal when there is evidence of actual bias.
Before becoming a judge in January, Wallace was an attorney in private practice. Lawyers for the four Republican and two unaffiliated voters who brought the case defended Wallace’s contribution, noting the prohibition on political contributions applies to “a judge or a judicial candidate.”
“Judge Wallace was neither a judge nor a judicial candidate on October 15, 2022, when the alleged contribution was made,” the attorneys wrote.
However, Gov. Jared Polis announced Wallace’s appointment on Aug. 18, 2022, meaning Wallace was aware at the time of her contribution that she would become a judge.
According to the secretary of state’s contribution database, Wallace gave several hundred dollars to Democratic candidates in the years prior to her judicial appointment. The recipients included Attorney General Phil Weiser and Secretary of State Jena Griswold, who is a party to the case involving Trump’s ballot eligibility.
Trump did not take issue with any of those other contributions in his recusal motion. Nor did he contest Wallace’s $100 contribution to the Democratic U.S. Senate candidate in Georgia around the time of her October 2022 contribution.
The hearing is scheduled to continue for the rest of the week. The petitioners are asking Wallace to bar Griswold from placing Trump on next year’s ballot under the theory that he stoked an insurrection to disrupt the counting of the 2020 Electoral College votes. Therefore, under the 14th Amendment, he is ineligible to hold office again. Trump’s lawyers have defended his behavior as protected under the First Amendment.
The case is Anderson et al. v. Griswold.
