Sounds like we will be talking about this a bunch in the upcoming months so we might as well get that ball rolling. From what I’m reading this very likely will be used to keep Trump off primary ballots unless the SCOTUS intervenes.
At issue with Trump is Section 3 of the amendment, which bars from office anyone who, having previously sworn an oath to support the Constitution, has "engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof." The language was written to prevent former officials who had backed the Confederacy from regaining power, subject to an out — Congress could grant amnesty by a two-thirds vote.
A group of conservative lawyers wrote a long opinion piece after researching this extensively and to hear them tell it, it’s pretty straightforward and conclusive. Here’s the abstract:
The Sweep and Force of Section Three University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 172, Forthcoming 126 Pages Posted: 14 Aug 2023 William Baude University of Chicago - Law School
Michael Stokes Paulsen University of St. Thomas School of Law
Date Written: August 9, 2023
Abstract Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment forbids holding office by former office holders who then participate in insurrection or rebellion. Because of a range of misperceptions and mistaken assumptions, Section Three’s full legal consequences have not been appreciated or enforced. This article corrects those mistakes by setting forth the full sweep and force of Section Three.
First, Section Three remains an enforceable part of the Constitution, not limited to the Civil War, and not effectively repealed by nineteenth century amnesty legislation. Second, Section Three is self-executing, operating as an immediate disqualification from office, without the need for additional action by Congress. It can and should be enforced by every official, state or federal, who judges qualifications. Third, to the extent of any conflict with prior constitutional rules, Section Three repeals, supersedes, or simply satisfies them. This includes the rules against bills of attainder or ex post facto laws, the Due Process Clause, and even the free speech principles of the First Amendment. Fourth, Section Three covers a broad range of conduct against the authority of the constitutional order, including many instances of indirect participation or support as “aid or comfort.” It covers a broad range of former offices, including the Presidency. And in particular, it disqualifies former President Donald Trump, and potentially many others, because of their participation in the attempted overthrow of the 2020 presidential election.
And here’s a link to the paper, so that the brilliant (sic) legal minds of the Fire can parse it:
I hardly consider any events around Jan 6 to be considered an "insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof". If it does, then any protest could be considered the same.
Sounds like we will be talking about this a bunch in the upcoming months so we might as well get that ball rolling. From what I’m reading this very likely will be used to keep Trump off primary ballots unless the SCOTUS intervenes.
At issue with Trump is Section 3 of the amendment, which bars from office anyone who, having previously sworn an oath to support the Constitution, has "engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof." The language was written to prevent former officials who had backed the Confederacy from regaining power, subject to an out — Congress could grant amnesty by a two-thirds vote.
A group of conservative lawyers wrote a long opinion piece after researching this extensively and to hear them tell it, it’s pretty straightforward and conclusive. Here’s the abstract:
The Sweep and Force of Section Three University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 172, Forthcoming 126 Pages Posted: 14 Aug 2023 William Baude University of Chicago - Law School
Michael Stokes Paulsen University of St. Thomas School of Law
Date Written: August 9, 2023
Abstract Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment forbids holding office by former office holders who then participate in insurrection or rebellion. Because of a range of misperceptions and mistaken assumptions, Section Three’s full legal consequences have not been appreciated or enforced. This article corrects those mistakes by setting forth the full sweep and force of Section Three.
First, Section Three remains an enforceable part of the Constitution, not limited to the Civil War, and not effectively repealed by nineteenth century amnesty legislation. Second, Section Three is self-executing, operating as an immediate disqualification from office, without the need for additional action by Congress. It can and should be enforced by every official, state or federal, who judges qualifications. Third, to the extent of any conflict with prior constitutional rules, Section Three repeals, supersedes, or simply satisfies them. This includes the rules against bills of attainder or ex post facto laws, the Due Process Clause, and even the free speech principles of the First Amendment. Fourth, Section Three covers a broad range of conduct against the authority of the constitutional order, including many instances of indirect participation or support as “aid or comfort.” It covers a broad range of former offices, including the Presidency. And in particular, it disqualifies former President Donald Trump, and potentially many others, because of their participation in the attempted overthrow of the 2020 presidential election.
And here’s a link to the paper, so that the brilliant (sic) legal minds of the Fire can parse it:
![[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]](https://i.postimg.cc/qMjL6f8C/27-FD3-F35-D9-CF-4-FC0-AE24-D01508-F7-AF1-C.gif)
