There have been many amicus curiae briefs submitted in Trump v. Anderson, where the U.S. Supreme Court will review a Colorado Supreme Court decision disqualifying Donald Trump from appearing on the state’s 2024 ballot on grounds he violated section 3 of the federal Constitution’s 14th amendment by engaging in insurrection. One of the briefs — submitted today — is on behalf of seven former state supreme court justices, and one of the seven is former California Supreme Court Justice Joseph Grodin.

Justice Grodin is joined in the brief by former state high court jurists from Florida, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, and North Carolina (two of the former justices are from North Carolina). Combined, the seven amici have almost 100 years of state supreme court experience.

The brief says the amici “seek to ensure that state courts retain their ability to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment without special permission from Congress, that states may adjudicate candidate eligibility challenges; and that state court judges and staff are protected from threats and political violence.” It claims, “State courts have a particular interest in vindicating Section 3’s purpose: protecting the republic from insurrectionists returning to power. Trump exemplifies this risk by repeatedly threatening judges, judicial employees, and others involved in the court system.”

Oral argument in the case is set for a week from tomorrow.

Justice Grodin has not been reticent about taking public positions on important issues. See:

Former justices join call for State Bar disciplinary investigation of former president’s lawyer

Former Justice Grodin signs letter condemning President’s election lawyers and calling for disciplinary investigations

Justice Grodin on the president’s abuses of power

A dozen prosecutors and Justice Grodin support the Chief Justice in her immigration-arrests dispute with feds

Two former California Supreme Court justices are SCOTUS amici against travel ban; brief draws parallels to Nazi Germany