When she was deciding whether to sign on to a lawsuit aimed at disqualifying Donald Trump from Colorado’s ballot on constitutional grounds, longstanding Republican Krista Kafer says she was reminded of Aesop’s fable about belling the cat.

“The mice get together and they think, if we put a bell on the cat, we’ll hear him coming,” said the newspaper columnist and adjunct professor. “But then no one steps forward to bell the cat.”

Kafer paused for a rueful chuckle.

“I kept thinking, somebody’s got to bell the cat,” she said. “If I agree with what’s in this lawsuit, if I believe that Trump fomented, participated in an insurrection to stop the peaceful transfer of power, then I need to put my name on that. I need to bell the cat.”

Noting that she’s been a Republican as long as she’s been an adult – she ran for a legislative seat in 2010 and two years ago ran for Littleton City Council – Kafer said that Trump’s attempt to stay in power after losing the 2020 election to Joe Biden crossed a firm line.

“I’ve been a Republican for 30 years. I have lot of friends who are Democrats, but as a principle, we’re all Americans,” she said. “He tried to disenfranchise millions of Americans that I disagree with on the issues, but they’re my fellow Americans. If a Democrat did what Trump did, wouldn’t I expect others to step forward on my behalf? That was my thinking.”

Kafer is one of six Colorado voters – four Republicans and two registered unaffiliated – who sued Secretary of State Jena Griswold in September to bar Trump from next year’s presidential primary ballot. They argued that the former president is ineligible to serve under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which disqualifies officials who “engaged in insurrection” after having sworn an oath to protect the Constitution.

Following a five-day hearing in Denver District Court last month, Judge Sarah B. Wallace found that Trump participated in an insurrection by encouraging supporters to block Congress from certifying Biden’s win on Jan. 6, 2021, but also ruled that the rarely invoked constitutional provision doesn’t apply to the presidency.

This week, after both sides appealed, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled in a 4-3 decision that Trump isn’t qualified to appear on state ballots, concluding that he doesn’t meet the requirements spelled out in the post-Civl War amendment. The order is stayed until Jan. 4, 2024, anticipating a near-certain appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

“There are five qualifications in the Constitution for running for president – age, residency, citizenship, you can’t run for more than two terms, and you can’t have engaged in insurrection,” she said.

The Constitution’s requirements apply to everybody, regardless of how much you like a potential candidate, she said.

“There are people who would love to vote for Barack Obama for a third term, but he can’t run again,” she said. “I’m sure there are Swifties who would love to see Taylor Swift in the White House, but she isn’t 35 yet.”

Kafer said she added her name on the Colorado lawsuit to ensure that the Constitution is enforced.

“We don’t have a lot of jurisprudence around this clause,” she acknowledged. “But even if the Supreme Court reverses Colorado’s ruling, I think it’s important that the court weighs in and clarifies – we need clarity.”

Kafer said when local election law attorney Mario Nicolais – a former Republican – approached her to join the lawsuit, she was only acquainted with one of her fellow petitioners, former longtime state legislator Norma Anderson, R-Lakewood, the first woman to serve as majority leader in the Colorado Senate.

“I have a lot of respect for her, but I really didn’t know the other people. I thought, if you believe something, and you’re in a position to move that forward, you should do it,” Kafer said. “If you can do good, do it.”

She said she understands not everyone is able to take as public a stand as she has. Numerous friends – and some strangers – have told Kafer they couldn’t do what she’s doing because they would lose clients, see their businesses suffer or otherwise face unacceptable consequences.

“They weren’t in a position to do what they wanted to do, and I am,” she said.

As a weekly columnist for the Denver Post and regular panelist on Colorado Inside Out, PBS12’s weekly public affairs program, Kafer is used to being in the public eye. But that didn’t prepare her for the blowback the lawsuit has sparked.

“I’ve gotten a lot of really nice comments, which has been really lovely,” she said. “I totally understand the disagreements people have. There are some thoughtful disagreements, and that’s fine.”

On Facebook and X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, however, Kafer said, it’s often a different story.

“I’ve been called a communist, a fascist, a swamp creature, things involving the F-word,” she said with a laugh. “A communist-fascist is an interesting combination. There’s a little ignorance of history there. Some of them are hilarious. My favorite was ‘Your is evil’ – that’s my absolute favorite, that crystalizes it right there.”

Kafer said she’s had to stick to a “no-response” policy.

“I’ve got fans on the left and the right that will then go after these people, which I find very sweet, to do that,” she said with a sigh. “But you just don’t want to get into conversations with people. It escalates. They’re not there for the conversation, they’re there to express their anger.”

She’s also been the target of condemnation from the political party she’s belonged to for decades.

After the lawsuit was filed, the Colorado GOP blasted its participants on X.

“Never-Trumpers, RINO’s, & Democrats are colluding to block @realDonaldTrump from accessing the 2024 Colorado Republican Primary Ballot,” tweeted the Republicans, who later intervened in the lawsuit on Trump’s side. “We won’t let them get away with it without a fight. Colorado Republicans will decide who gets on the primary ballot, not corrupt Democrats or a leftwing judge.”

Earlier this month, the Arapahoe County Republican Party formally censured Kafer and the lawsuit’s three other Republican petitioners.

Kafer said she was encouraged by a YouGov poll released on Dec. 21 showing that Americans agree by a wide majority with the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision barring Trump from the ballot, with fully 25% of Republicans saying they support the ruling.

“It’s very difficult for me to relate to hard-core Trump supporters because of all the things that Trump did after the election,” she said, adding that she voted for Trump in 2020, even though she had begun to sour on him before the events of Jan. 6.

“I know some people believe in conspiracy theories, but I know other people who don’t but still plan to vote for him because they think that’s how we win, win bigly,” she said. “Everybody has a litmus test, but some people will vote partisan no matter what.”

Kafer, who worked in Washington as a congressional aide in the late 1990s, including during former President Bill Clinton’s impeachment, acknowledged that when she was younger, she “genuinely believed Republicans were a little bit more virtuous than Democrats” but has since changed her mind. 

“I know people can get into that mindset – ‘My side would never do that!'” she said. “People think the ends justify the means: ‘If we don’t win, the other side will do x, y and z.’ But no side is more innately virtuous than the other.”

It’s just human nature, Kafer said, though she allowed that tribal loyalties appear to be stronger than they were a couple of decades ago.

“The sad thing is, if the situation were reversed – if a Democrat had done what Trump had done – the Republican Party would be 100% supportive of this ruling,” she said.

Ernest Luning has covered politics for Colorado Politics and its predecessor publication, The Colorado Statesman, since 2009. He’s analyzed the exploits, foibles and history of state campaigns and politicians since 2018 in the weekly Trail Mix column.