Efforts to disqualify Trump from state ballots are starting to materialize.
Donald Trump’s Battle :-
Former President Donald Trump’s legal battles are continuing to escalate in Washington, Georgia, and New York – the list keeps growing.
But even though all these cases seem to be going in his favor, legal experts suggest that a new legal challenge could still sideline him.
Apart from criminal cases, in recent weeks, a growing group of conservative scholars has raised constitutional arguments that Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election results render him ineligible to hold federal office again.
This argument of ineligibility is based on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which states that a public official who had “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against” the United States, or “given aid or comfort to its enemies,” cannot hold public office and cannot be pardoned by Congress except by a two-thirds majority vote.
Legal groups have long argued that Trump’s behavior after the 2020 election fits the criteria. This argument gained new life at the beginning of this month when members of the conservative Federalist Society, William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulsen, endorsed it in the pages of the Pennsylvania Law Review.
They wrote, “If the public record is accurate, the case for disqualification is near-certain. He is now not eligible for the presidency.”
Since then, two more legal scholars – retired conservative federal appellate Judge J. Michael Luttig and Harvard Law Professor Emeritus Laurence Tribe – have made the same case in an article published in The Atlantic.
They wrote, “Disqualification is a self-executing provision. It is separate from and independent of any criminal process, and indeed is even independent of Congress’s power under the Impeachment Clauses. It was designed to be directly and immediately applicable to those who violate their oaths to the Constitution, whether by leveling arms at our government to turn it around by force or by seeking to overturn presidential elections through bloodless coups.”
This week, this debate over the Republican presidential nomination heated up on a stage in Milwaukee.
“More than a year ago, I declared that Donald Trump was morally unqualified to assume the office of president again as a result of what transpired on January 6. Asa Hutchinson, the governor of Arkansas, remarked, “More people, including conservative legal professors, are appreciating the necessity of this, to a mixture of enthusiasm and applause from the audience. “I won’t support someone who has been charged with serious crimes or who is ineligible under our Constitution,” the speaker said.
Bode and Paulsen’s argument is one of “self-execution.” They argue that public election officials don’t need special permission from legislators to declare Trump ineligible: if they believe the argument is valid, they can independently declare candidates unfit.
Moreover, the scholars argue that election officials have a legal duty to do so.
“Bode and Paulsen write, ‘No official is exempt from these duties. It would be wrong – indeed, it would itself be a constitutional violation of the officeholder’s oath – to leave the officeholder’s responsibilities to interpret, apply, and enforce his or her own obligations under Section Three.'” As an alternative, ordinary citizens themselves can challenge state election officials on the same basis.”
Table of Contents :-
Introduction:
The 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution is a pivotal component that addresses a comprehensive array of citizen rights and security concerns. Within this amendment, Section 3 assumes significant importance due to its implications for individuals linked to rebellion or participation in rebellion against the United States. Recent legal events involving former President Donald Trump have reignited interest in this provision and its relevance.
Understanding Section 3:
Section 3 of the 14th Amendment states that no person shall hold any office, including public office, if they have previously taken an oath to support the United States Constitution and subsequently engaged in rebellion or participated in rebellion, or provided assistance or solace to its adversaries. This clause aimed primarily to prevent individuals who participated actively in the Confederacy during the Civil War from seizing control of public positions within the American government.
The Emerging Legal Challenge:
Recent occurrences have thrust Section 3 of the 14th Amendment back into the limelight. The storming of the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, and the subsequent impeachment trial of former President Trump have led legal scholars and experts to explore the potential application of Section 3 in preventing Trump from holding future public office.
Critics contend that Trump’s statements and actions before and during the Capitol incident could be construed as an incitement to rebellion or participation in rebellion, potentially falling within the scope of Section 3. While the House of Representatives impeached him, the Senate fell short of the two-thirds majority required to find him guilty and bar him from holding future office.
Legal Precedents and Challenges:
Interpreting Section 3 in modern contexts poses a unique challenge, as its application has historically been limited and primarily targeted those involved in the Confederate rebellion. The ongoing legal battle surrounding Trump and Section 3 raises questions about whether the clause’s reach should be extended to encompass actions that may not precisely align with previous instances of rebellion or participation in rebellion.
Conclusion:
As legal experts and scholars continue to debate the application of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment in the case of former President Trump, this discourse highlights the adaptability and ongoing significance of the U.S. Constitution. The outcome of this legal challenge will not only shape the future political landscape but will also establish a precedent for interpreting constitutional provisions in the modern world.
Another Post Links :-
https://onworldsnews.com/death-of-wrestling-star-bray-wyatt/
Â
