The Michigan Supreme Court rejected an attempt to disqualify former U.S. President Donald Trump from the 2024 election based on the "Insurrection Ban" stipulated in the U.S. Constitution.

The result contradicts the recent ruling issued by the Colorado Supreme Court, which led to Trump's exclusion from the primary vote due to his role in the Capitol riot on January 6.

With these conflicting decisions, the anticipated appeals before the U.S. Supreme Court become more significant, especially as the country races toward the start of the 2024 primary elections. Unlike Colorado, the lawsuit in Michigan never reached trial and was dismissed early in the process, with the Intermediate Court of Appeals upholding the dismissal decision.

The Michigan Court of Claims judge, who initially considered the case, said that state law does not grant election officials any discretion to monitor the eligibility of candidates for the presidential primaries, and also said that the case raises a political question that should not be decided in courts.

The Michigan Court of Appeals upheld his decision, saying: “At present, the only event about to occur is the presidential primary, but as noted, the exclusion of Trump has nothing to do with his status in this particular vote.

The order issued by the Michigan Supreme Court was unsigned, and the court did not announce the vote count.

Unlike Colorado, Michigan courts dismissed the case entirely for procedural reasons, and they never reached questions about whether January 6 was an insurrection and whether Trump participated in it.

One of Michigan's judges today Wednesday explained why Michigan differs from Colorado, where Judge Elizabeth Welch, who compared Michigan law with Colorado state law, wrote that Trump’s opponents "did not identify any similar provision in Michigan election law that requires a person seeking the office of President of the United States to attest to their legal qualifications to hold the office,” comparing Michigan law with Colorado election law.

The Fourteenth Amendment, ratified after the Civil War, provides that officials who took an oath to support the Constitution are barred from holding office in the future if they "engaged in insurrection." This provision was used to exclude thousands of former Confederates but has only been applied twice since 1919, and the vague wording does not mention the presidency.

The lawsuit in Michigan was filed in September by an advocacy organization called "Freedom of Expression for the People" on behalf of a group of voters; it also pursued an unsuccessful Fourteenth Amendment challenge against Trump in Minnesota and recently filed a new case in Oregon. The Colorado lawsuit was initiated by a separate liberal-leaning group.