Local law enforcement authorities confirmed they are investigating threats against Colorado Supreme Court justices, who concluded on Tuesday that Donald Trump is ineligible to run for the state’s presidential primary election. 

The police also beefed up security measures surrounding the homes where the justices live, and the FBI is aware of the situation.   

The Dec. 19, unsigned opinion was the first by any state supreme court to address head-on the substantive arguments of Trump’s – or any presidential candidate’s – eligibility. The court, which split, agreed that Trump engaged in an insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021.

The court put its ruling on hold, anticipating an appeal from Trump, the leading contender for the Republican nomination.     

“The Denver Police Department is currently investigating incidents directed at Colorado Supreme Court justices and will continue working with our local, state and federal law enforcement partners to thoroughly investigate any reports of threats or harassment,” the Denver Police Department said in a statement to The Denver Gazette.

“Due to the open investigations and safety and privacy considerations, we will not be providing details of these investigations. The Department is providing extra patrols around justice’s residences in Denver and will provide additional safety support if/as requested.”

The FBI said it is aware of the situation and is working with local law enforcement.

“We will vigorously pursue investigations of any threat or use of violence committed by someone who uses extremist views to justify their actions regardless of motivation,” said Vikki Migoya, a spokesperson for the FBI’s Denver office.

The court’s decision to disqualify Trump means the former president faces a tight deadline as he prepares to fight the ruling before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold must certify the candidates for next year’s primary on Jan. 5, 2024.

Colorado’s justices said if a review is sought in the U.S. Supreme Court before their stay expires, then the hold would remain in place, and Griswold must “continue to be required to include President Trump’s name on the 2024 presidential primary ballot until the receipt of any order or mandate from the Supreme Court.”

Note that the requirement is “if review is sought” – which means a trigger for Griswold’s office to keep Trump on the ballot – is an appeal by Trump.

Of course, the appeal could be filed within days and the Supreme Court could rule, giving clarity to Griswold’s office, before Jan. 5.

In ruling against Trump, the majority said they did not reach their conclusions lightly. 

“We are mindful of the magnitude and weight of the questions now before us. We are likewise mindful of our solemn duty to apply the law, without fear or favor, and without being swayed by public reaction to the decisions that the law mandates we reach,” they said.

The majority noted it had “little difficulty” concluding there was sufficient evidence to deem the deadly mob attack of Jan. 6 an insurrection, and that Trump’s own actions to stop the certification of President Joe Biden’s victory were directly linked to the insurrection.

Three justices dissented, two of whom voiced concerns about the former president’s right to due process.

“From my perspective, just because a hearing was held and (Trump) participated, it doesn’t mean that due process was observed,” wrote Chief Justice Brian D. Boatright.

“The decision to bar former President Donald J. Trump,” added Justice Carlos A. Samour Jr., “flies in the face of the due process doctrine.”

Reporter Michael Karlik of Colorado Politics contributed in this article.