A federal lawsuit filed by Texas resident John Anthony Castro in an attempt to prevent former President Donald Trump from appearing on the West Virginia electoral ballot has been rejected by U.S. District Judge Irene Berger.
John Anthony Castro sought to block Trump’s inclusion on the primary and general election ballots, citing the 14th Amendment, which disqualifies individuals who have engaged in insurrection or rebellion from federal office. The dismissal of the lawsuit marks a victory for Trump, allowing him to feature on the West Virginia ballot.
In her ruling, Judge Berger highlighted that Castro failed to provide evidence that his own campaign in West Virginia would be adversely affected by Trump’s presence on the ballot. She emphasized the lack of a legitimate campaign presence, polling, campaign funds, and advertising in the state, indicating that Castro’s lawsuits in multiple states were more focused on litigation than securing votes.
The decision to dismiss the lawsuit has garnered support from West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey, who described the lawsuit as frivolous and without merit, emphasizing that any eligible candidate has the right to be on the ballot unless legally disqualified.
Despite the ruling, John Anthony Castro expressed criticism, claiming that his candidacy for president was perceived in “bad faith” by Judge Irene Berger and the legal system. He argued that his campaign is based on his principles and not aimed at enriching himself or corporate oligarchs.
In a memorandum opinion and order released Thursday evening, U.S. District Judge Irene C. Berger granted motions made by attorneys for Trump, Secretary of State Mac Warner, and the West Virginia Republican Party to dismiss a lawsuit brought in September by Texas resident and write-in presidential candidate John Anthony Castro.
Berger also ordered that Castro’s case be dismissed without prejudice, which would allow Castro to possibly file the case again during the candidate filing period in West Virginia beginning Monday, Jan. 8, through Saturday, Jan. 27. “This is a big win for the integrity of our elections,” said Attorney General Patrick Morrisey in a statement Thursday evening.
“This lawsuit was frivolous to begin with and without merit – it had no basis in either law or fact. Any eligible candidate has the right to be on the ballot unless legally disqualified, and we will defend the laws of West Virginia and the right of voters and candidates to the fullest,” he added.
In her memorandum opinion, Berger said that Castro’s lawsuit was disingenuous, considering that there were no signs that Castro had actively campaigned for president in West Virginia or had any campaign presence in the state at all.
“The evidence establishes that he has no campaign offices, staff, or advertising in West Virginia, does not appear in polling, has little name recognition among West Virginia Republican primary voters, and has extremely minimal campaign funds, vastly insufficient to run an actual campaign,” Berger wrote. “If there were any question as to whether the allegations in the complaint are sufficient to overcome a facial challenge, the evidentiary submissions remove any doubt that Mr. Castro’s purported ‘campaign’ exists as a vehicle for pursuing litigation, not votes.”
Source: News and Sentinel
Amid the legal battle, it is evident that the issue of ballot eligibility for presidential candidates is a contentious and complex matter, with implications for the integrity of elections and the political landscape. The dismissal of the lawsuit in West Virginia serves as a notable development in the ongoing efforts to clarify the legal parameters surrounding this issue.
As the case unfolds, it remains to be seen whether John Anthony Castro will pursue further legal action during the candidate filing period in West Virginia. Regardless, the outcome of this lawsuit has sparked discussions about the intersection of legal challenges, election integrity, and the rights of candidates to participate in the democratic process.
Castro’s vocal opposition to the dismissal underscores the deeply entrenched beliefs and convictions that underpin his candidacy, setting the stage for continued debates and legal maneuvers as the 2024 presidential election cycle unfolds.
Whether this episode will have a lasting impact on the political and legal landscape remains to be seen, but it has undoubtedly shone a spotlight on the intricate and often contentious nature of electoral laws and candidate eligibility in the United States.
West Virginia Federal Judge Irene Berger declares that I’m running for President “in bad faith” to “manufacture” standing. So if I was a corrupt POS running for President to enrich myself and corporate oligarchs, they’d find “good faith.”
But because I’m running for President… pic.twitter.com/RiLq2JRX1T
— John Anthony Castro (@realJohnACastro) December 21, 2023
