As we reported, the Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows made the decision to boot former President Donald Trump off the ballot on the basis of the 14th Amendment  for insurrection, despite him never being convicted or even charged with insurrection. Not to mention that the 14th Amendment doesn't apply to presidents and the facts don't support the claim of insurrection in any event. Her decision was even worse than the decision in Colorado, her decision wasn't even a court decision. You can read her decision here.

READ MORE: Maine Secretary of State Bars Trump From Presidential Primary Ballot

Bellows hit the airwaves to defend her decision. She even had the temerity to brag about voter participation as she disenfranchised millions with her decision. But as with the Colorado decision, she suspended her decision pending court review and the Trump team said they would be taking it to court. 

WATCH: Maine Sec of State Defends Move to Boot Trump, but Suspends Decision and Gets Blasted

George Washington professor Jonathan Turley decimated her decision in a thread on X.

He said he had decided to "add her name to the ignoble list of Democratic officials claiming to defend democracy by preventing its exercise for millions of Trump supporters" and that "Maine shows why the Court needs to rule quickly, clearly, and hopefully unanimously in rejecting this pernicious theory."

He did not think much of her reasoning. 

The "decision" is a litany of conclusory statements consistent with Bellows' prior public condemnations of the "insurrection" and Trump. It will now be subject to judicial review where Maine judges will hopefully show the same fealty to the constitution as other courts in rejecting this theory...

Jonathan Turley: "It is really striking how Bellows cloaks herself as a defender of democracy in this statement when she is preventing voters from casting their vote for what is currently the leading candidate for the presidency. So it’s a very odd claim to make in my view." pic.twitter.com/Q64dUzBQrL

— MAGA War Room (@MAGAIncWarRoom) December 29, 2023

He explained that he believed the 14th challengers to Trump in Maine went there because of Bellows' statements after Jan. 6 that it was an insurrection [thinking that they would have a better shot]. Turley emphasized this was the Secretary of State's decision and not a court decision. He noted that she was a Democrat. He reiterated this would still have to face judicial scrutiny and hoped that the court in Maine would have the same integrity as states other than Colorado to reject this. 

"It is really striking how Bellows cloaks herself as a defender of democracy in this statement when she is preventing voters from casting their vote for what is currently the leading candidate for the presidency. So it’s, it''s a very odd claim to make in my view."

Turley went on to call her take fundamentally flawed, saying it wasn't an insurrection -- it was a protest that turned into a riot. "There are a host of problems, including applying this provision to Donald Trump." He hoped that it "added to the urgency" for SCOTUS to rule on and settle the question. He hoped SCOTUS should act "with unanimity to put this dangerous theory away for good."

I believe Turley is correct, that SCOTUS is likely to take it up, particularly given the varying takes from the different state courts and secretaries of state, and that they will rule against it applying to Trump. But in the meantime, don't be surprised if more courts/Secretaries of State jump aboard this bad bandwagon in the pernicious effort to take out Trump.