Originally posted by Larry Heath:
quote:
Originally posted by Larry Heath:
Be that as it may. Trump may not even be running, for a whole host of reasons, 91 so far, with more not far off on the horizon.
Then too, there is the Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3
Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3:
"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. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability."
All it takes is any states Attorney General to invoke it and disallow Trump to run in their state. You can't win if you are not on the ballot. Which may of course be over ridden by 2/3rds vote in both houses of congress.
Some thought on this subject by Lawrence Tribe ->
https://t.co/85oAp5oFAL
Re: 14th
Legal Scholars: Professor Laurence Tribe & retired federal judge Michael Luttig highlight in their article in
@TheAtlantic
the self-executing nature of the 14th Amendment's Section 3 "disqualification clause" that excludes from office in the United States government any person who after taking an oath to support and defend our Constitution then engages in insurrection or rebellion against the same or gives aid or comfort to the enemies of the Constitution.
The Constitution:
14th Amendment, Section 3:
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. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
Federalist Society Law Professors:
Tribe & Luttig praise the forthcoming University of Pennsylvania law review article by two Federalist Society conservative law professors: William Baude of the University of Chicago and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St. Thomas who conclude that Trump is ineligible to run again.
How would it work?
Individual actions would arise state by state likely under what are known as quo warranto laws which give a broad variety of stakeholders the ability to bring such actions. A good analysis of these is set forth in
https://justsecurity.org/84896...ionists-from-office/Criticism of Section 3 is Off-Base
Critics of the process who claim that it is legally flawed because it is untested and would be unwieldy miss the mark. First, it is not untested. A recent case in New Mexico successfully removed a Jan 6 insurrectionist from a county commission post.
https://citizensforethics.org/...uary-6-insurrection/Second, the fact that all 50 states have different laws hardly supports an argument that a Constitutional provision is flawed.
Political Effect
Some concern may exist that any such efforts might backfire by either further energizing Trump's base. While that is likely true, in the short term it might allow Trump to more easily capture the Republican nomination that is likely to happen anyway. The real political damage to Trump would be in the general election where such efforts if successful in even one of the battleground would be crippling to Trump's ability to win the general election. Moreover, the timing of such actions and likely appeal to the Supreme Court make the effect far more likely to be felt in the general election.
