- The Colorado Supreme Court declined to hear State Representative Dave Williams’ appeal over his name on the ballot.
- Williams sought to have “Let’s Go Brandon” added to the GOP’s June Congressional primary vote.
- Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold argued that Williams used a slogan rather than a name.
The Colorado Supreme Court, in a unanimous order on Friday, declined to hear the appeal in the case of a Colorado lawmaker who tried to use the phrase “Let’s Go Brandon” – an anti-Biden slur – in a primary vote. June Republican for the state’s 5th ballot. Congressional District, according to The Gazette.
State Representative Dave Williams, who is challenging eight-term Republican Representative Doug Lamborn in an intraparty dispute, sued Democratic Secretary of State Jena Griswold last week after her office rejected allowing his name to appear on the vote as Dave “Let’s Go Brandon “Williams.
The phrase became a rallying cry among conservatives to register their dissatisfaction with President Joe Biden. It became part of the GOP lexicon after NBC Sports reporter Kelli Stavast said the crowd in the background of her October 2021 interview with NASCAR driver Brandon Brown was chanting, “Come on, Brandon.”
However, the audience can be heard shouting the decidedly explicit “F–k Joe Biden”.
Many Republicans said they feel as if the reporter who used the sanitized language was engaging in a form of media bias rather than an attempt to avoid violating the Federal Communications Commission’s strict rules against profanity during the NASCAR broadcast.
Williams in court documents said he began using the moniker “Let’s Go Brandon” in December 2021, noting that he also employed the phrase in his public communications.
However, the court on Friday allowed Denver Judge Andrew McCallin’s earlier ruling to stand.
McCallin on Wednesday found Williams used the phrase as a nickname, but agreed that Griswold was standing to prevent it from being printed on the ballot.
On Thursday, Williams appealed the decision to the Colorado Supreme Court, claiming it presented “an important issue of consequences,” specifically the “scope of the Secretary of State’s authority to ban nicknames at the polls.” Lawyers for her argued that McCallin’s decision should be discarded because Colorado law does not allow for a “campaign slogan” exception in relation to elections and ballots.
“If the Colorado Supreme Court does not hear this appeal, they are in breach of their duty and lawmakers must remove their salaries or fire them without delay,” Williams said at the time.
After Friday’s ruling, Williams sharply criticized the Colorado Supreme Court ruling that barred him from using the anti-Biden phrase in the vote.
“At a time when the credibility of the judiciary is in question because of the scandals it’s been involved in, you’d think the Colorado Supreme Court would want to at least justify their salaries that taxpayers provide them by actually doing their job.” he wrote. in a text message to Colorado Politics. “They are negligent of their duty and it is clear they want to help their fellow Democrats violate the rule of law.”
Griswold has yet to comment on the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision, but on Wednesday she applauded McCallin’s decision, saying it “asserts that the ballot’s contents are not a place for political play.”
“As Secretary of State, I will always protect Colorado voters’ right to accessible elections, and that includes fair and transparent voting,” he added.