Talk:Trump v. Anderson

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Trump v. Anderson article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

United States: Colorado / Presidential elections / Presidents Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Colorado portal This article is supported by WikiProject Colorado, our collaboration to create, improve, and update Wikipedia articles about the U.S. State of Colorado. To comment about this article, select the Add topic tab above. For questions about, or to make suggestions for Colorado articles, go to our project's talk page. We invite you to join us!
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. presidential elections (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject United States Presidents (assessed as Low-importance).

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics: American Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force.

U.S. Supreme Court cases High‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, a collaborative effort to improve articles related to Supreme Court cases and the Supreme Court. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.U.S. Supreme Court casesWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesTemplate:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesU.S. Supreme Court articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

WaPost story on Norma Anderson and her role in the case

Better link?

Can we get a better link to the Colorado Supreme Court decision? There's a lot of palaver accessing it through the NY Times. PatGallacher (talk) 16:20, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the NY Times article is already linked as reference 27, so including it in external links is superfluous. Also, I think on Wikipedia we discourage links which involve going through paywalls and the like. PatGallacher (talk) 01:00, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored the cite, as it's required by short form references in the article. It should never have been in the External links section, but the Works cited section. See references #8, 11, 17, and 19, the documentation for {{sfn}} templates and the tracking category Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 12:18, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the cite for this (as well as the August 1 Trump indictment) to link directly to the official versions hosted by the state-court (and justice-department). skeptical scientist (talk) 00:25, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looks fine to me, the cite just has to be there to support the "Colorado Supreme Court 2023" refs in the article. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 00:34, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More on District court, please

This is a good summary, “ The trial began on October 30. Judge Sarah B. Wallace refused a request from Trump's lawyers to dismiss the case. On November 17, Wallace ruled that Trump engaged in insurrection but could remain on the ballot, …”, but given how important the presented evidence is in this court’s decision, the CO SC, and presumably the future SCOTUS decision, it would be helpful to summarize what the evidence for and against insurrection as well as for applicability of Section 3 of the 14th amendment was presented by both sides. Thx. В²C ☎ 22:09, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Supreme Court appeal

I'd like to work in Williams v. Rhodes as a precedent for SCOTUS review of the state supreme court decision on a presidential elections matter, but don't quite know how. Maybe someone else can figure it out. ☆ Bri (talk) 22:37, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Who is Anderson?

Griswold is Colorado Secretary of State. This can be found in the text. But who is Anderson? 5.181.58.1 (talk) 21:35, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Added a one-sentence description to the text. The information can also be found in the court case infobox. --skeptical scientist (talk) 23:56, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is Anderson: Norma Anderson. 32.209.69.24 (talk) 02:52, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Court membership

Where is the Court membership ? It is exist is every US Supreme court case article. M.Karelin (talk) 02:48, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that the SCOTUS Cases template only shows the court membership once the case is decided, since it automatically shows the names of the justices that were members of the court on the date the case was decided. Ibira (talk) 10:21, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Jason Murray

I just created a draft for Jason Murray who represented the plaintiff in court today. I’m not sure if there’s enough out there to demonstrate GNG at the moment, but there may be as the weeks go on. Thriley (talk) 20:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Officer?

Does the ruling include whether the President is an officer of the United States? 207.96.32.81 (talk) 03:26, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It would be OR to state that. I've read the decision and it seems absolutely clear they categorize the president as an officier of the US but that is a question in the presidential immunity case, not this one. Masem (t) 05:18, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fairness

The fairness of this article is disputed, especially in reference to whether President Trump actually "incited" the riot when he did mention that supporters should "peacefully and patriotically" march to the Capitol. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:C2:1900:4EA0:BD62:6C91:2166:A5C4 (talk) 05:03, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]