According to Raffensperger, voters will be the ones to decide the outcome of the upcoming presidential election, not prosecutors or politicians. In an attempt to explain his position, Raffensperger recently wrote an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal aptly titled, “I Can’t Keep Trump off the Ballot.” The piece instantly became the subject of scrutiny with Raffensperger being heavily criticized for seeming to support Trump.

He explained that using his power to eliminate Trump from the 2024 presidential election would do more harm than good. “For a secretary of state to remove a candidate would only reinforce the grievances of those who see the system as rigged and corrupt,” he wrote. “Denying voters the opportunity to choose is fundamentally un-American.”

Filed by a group called Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, the lawsuit’s purpose is to find its way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Liberals have also demanded that lawmakers pull Trump from the ballot because the Constitution states that anyone who has “engaged in an insurrection or rebellion” should be barred from holding office.

He wrote, “Georgia law contemplates a legal process that must take place before anyone is removed from the ballot. Anyone who believes in democracy must let the voters decide.” He remained firm in his opinion it is not his responsibility to pull the strings of the election, writing, “The American people will make their own decisions.”

He said, “Attempts to invoke Section 3 against the candidacies of Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene and North Carolina Rep. Madison Cawthorn failed. Each of the cases required a decision in the courts.” He also noted how people are placing all of the blame onto him, writing, “But activists are urging secretaries of state like me to bar Mr. Trump from the ballot unilaterally.”

When it comes to dropping Trump, MSNBC writer Hayes Brown said that Raffensperger “has the responsibility to do so.” Brown has been an outspoken opponent of Georgia’s Secretary of State, writing, “The Republican’s piece is more about how he shouldn’t block Trump and less about whether he could.”

The political writer has even called Raffensperger’s character into question, saying, “The question, then, is whether Raffensperger wants to act in the best interests of his constituents. Georgia’s voters entrusted him with that power and no matter how much he tries to hand that power back, the law recognizes that power as his.”

While the comments section was largely divided, many on Brown’s side made valid arguments. Many commenters suggested that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment clearly outlines reasons why Trump should be disqualified from running in the election. Others brushed off Trump’s attempt to run for office, insisting that he would ultimately lose if he was allowed on the ballot.

Another person didn’t mince words when it came to sharing how they really felt, writing, “There is nothing ambiguous about the 14th Amendment. No interpretation is required. It states very clearly that no person involved in an attempt to overthrow the government can hold public office. The only thing lacking here is the courage to enforce it.”

“What part of the 14th Amendment don’t you understand?” asked one social media user. “It’s crystal clear. If you’re involved in an insurrection, you are disqualified. If I were a lawyer and my law license was revoked, I couldn’t practice law. The same people that argue against the 14th Amendment are just as quick to throw the First and Second Amendments in your face,” they wrote.

One commenter wrote, “Republicans are trash. These people are literally trying to steal our country. We watched it live on national television. None of them should be anywhere near our government and they should be in prison. Why they aren’t is a question the American public should be screaming at the courts.”

“Donald Trump has presidential immunity,” wrote a social media user. “All of these stupid cases will be dismissed. The only one that has a chance is the stupid civil case against the Trump Organization because that is alleged to have occurred prior to Trump being president.” Regardless of which side you are on, it’s clear Democrats and Republicans won’t be coming to an agreement any time soon.