Republicans reacted with predictable outrage and concern at the precedent set by the decision of a Colorado court to remove their party’s presumptive nominee from consideration in the 2024 presidential contest.

Allies and critics of former President Donald Trump alike, some of whom are actively running against him, both decried the Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling that Trump’s involvement leading up to and inaction during the events of January 6, 2021, disqualify him from serving a second term according to the U.S. Constitution.

“I do not believe Donald Trump should be prevented from being President of the United States, by any court. I think he should be prevented from being the President of the United States by the voters of this country. That’s what I think. And I don’t believe that it’s good for our country if he’s precluded from the ballot by a court,” former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, perhaps the most outspoken of Trump’s critics, said at a campaign event in New Hampshire.

Businessman Vivek Ramaswamy, who has often praised the former president while he makes his way through early voting states, went so far as to threaten to remove himself from the Colorado ballot in protest of Trump’s treatment.

“This is what an actual attack on democracy looks like: in an un-American, unconstitutional, and unprecedented decision, a cabal of Democrat judges are barring Trump from the ballot in Colorado. Having tried every trick in the book to eliminate President Trump from running in this election, the bipartisan Establishment is now deploying a new tactic to bar him from ever holding office again: the 14th Amendment,” Ramaswamy said in a statement released by his presidential campaign.

Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson called the decision a “partisan attack” and predicted the case would be swiftly overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court.

“Regardless of political affiliation, every citizen registered to vote should not be denied the right to support our former president and the individual who is the leader in every poll of the Republican primary. We trust the U.S. Supreme Court will set aside this reckless decision and let the American people decide the next President of the United States,” Johnson said in a statement.

There being no such thing as bad publicity, after the decision was handed down Tuesday — though stayed until January pending an assumed appeal to the high court — it was the subject of much of Trump’s campaign messaging throughout the following day, and the 45th President’s team was quick to point to in requests for donations sent to supporters. They also included messages from dozens of angry Congressmen.

“Apparently democracy is when judges tell people they’re not allowed to vote for the candidate leading in the polls? This is disgraceful. The Supreme Court must take the case and end this assault on American voters,” U.S. Sen. J.D. Vance, of Ohio, said in one message.

President Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic nominee, told the White House press pool that he wouldn’t comment on the case, but when asked if its fair to call Trump an “insurrectionist,” said some things are “self-evident.”

“You saw it all. Now, whether the 14th Amendment applies, I’ll let the court make that decision. But he certainly supported an insurrection. No question about it. None. Zero. And he seems to be doubling down on — about everything,” Biden said.

Some legal scholars have maintained for months that Trump is ineligible to seek the presidency and should be removed from the ballot because of his involvement — or if not his involvement, his lack of action — in the sacking of the U.S. Capitol.

If Trump’s actions or lack thereof meet the bar for insurrection, then the 14th Amendment, passed following the U.S. Civil War could theoretically make him ineligible to return to the White House.

“No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof,” Section Three reads, in part.

The law, which can be overridden by Congress if applied, was previously used to remove former Confederate military members from their political posts. It has never been applied to an office anywhere near as important as the presidency, and it’s unclear if it applies.

Massachusetts Secretary of State Bill Galvin, who oversees elections, says his office has already been sued over the same subject. That suit was dismissed, but there others are potentially pending that he thinks may soon become moot, if the court can act quickly enough.

“It’s going to resolve it one way or the other way and it’s better that it’s resolved now, as opposed to going through the whole process,” Galvin said.

The 2024 primaries will begin in about a month, when the first party delegates will be won in New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary.

Trump leads all of his Republican rivals by double digits in individual state polling and in national surveys, a position he has held for the entirety of the primary cycle. Polling also shows he has a slight lead over Biden, who he lost to in 2020.

Herald reporter Chris Van Buskirk contributed.