Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Editorials & Other Articles

Showing Original Post only (View all)

mahatmakanejeeves

(61,879 posts)
Thu Dec 26, 2024, 01:31 PM Dec 26

Congress has the power to block Trump from taking office, but lawmakers must act now [View all]

Hat tip, {redacted}

The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the view of The Hill
Congress has the power to block Trump from taking office, but lawmakers must act now

by Evan A. Davis and David M. Schulte, opinion contributors - 12/26/24 8:00 AM ET

The Constitution provides that an oath-breaking insurrectionist is ineligible to be president. This is the plain wording of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. “No person shall … hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath … 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.” This disability can be removed by a two-thirds vote in each House.

Disqualification is based on insurrection against the Constitution and not the government. The evidence of Donald Trump’s engaging in such insurrection is overwhelming. The matter has been decided in three separate forums, two of which were fully contested with the active participation of Trump’s counsel.

The first fully contested proceeding was Trump’s second impeachment trial. On Jan. 13, 2021, then-President Trump was impeached for “incitement of insurrection.” At the trial in the Senate, seven Republicans joined all Democrats to provide a majority for conviction but failed to reach the two-thirds vote required for removal from office. Inciting insurrection encompasses “engaging in insurrection” against the Constitution “or giving aid and comfort to the enemies thereof,” the grounds for disqualification specified in Section 3.

The second contested proceeding was the Colorado five-day judicial due process hearing where the court “found by clear and convincing evidence that President Trump engaged in insurrection as those terms are used in Section Three.” The Colorado Supreme Court affirmed. On further appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, the court held that states lack power to disqualify candidates for federal office and that federal legislation was required to enforce Section 3. The court did not address the finding that Trump had engaged in insurrection.

{snip}

Evan Davis was editor in chief of the Columbia Law Review and David Schulte was editor in chief of the Yale Law Journal. Both clerked for Justice Potter Stewart. Davis is a New York lawyer who served as president of the New York City Bar, and Schulte is a Chicago investment banker.
21 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
This is a waste of keystrokes displacedvermoter Dec 26 #1
Not for The Hill. It got them click$$$!!111!!1!!!1 PSPS Dec 26 #3
Can we simply ignore "the supreme Law of the Land" now? OKIsItJustMe Dec 28 #9
No chance. The POS won the election. Unfortunately, democracy doesn't guarantee the best candidates will win. Silent Type Dec 26 #2
Hypothetically, what's to prevent him from being elected a third time? OKIsItJustMe Dec 28 #8
You've answered your own question Fiendish Thingy Dec 28 #16
Here's the scenario I see OKIsItJustMe Dec 29 #17
You're describing a "contingent election", which doesn't apply here. Fiendish Thingy Dec 29 #20
It's guaranteed bloody civil war if we try to remove him. Intractable Dec 26 #4
Not going to happen Fiendish Thingy Dec 26 #5
According to the 14th amendment, it requires a ⅔'s majority of both houses to allow him to serve OKIsItJustMe Dec 28 #7
His disqualification has not been adjudicated Fiendish Thingy Dec 28 #10
Why does it need to be adjudicated? OKIsItJustMe Dec 28 #11
How else would one determine if a person is disqualified from holding office under the 14th? Fiendish Thingy Dec 28 #14
Disqualified: The case for Donald Trump's disqualification under the 14th Amendment OKIsItJustMe Dec 28 #13
So, who decides? Some guy? You? Elon Musk? Fiendish Thingy Dec 28 #15
It's not going to happen, of course, but lees1975 Dec 29 #18
In January of 2021 a bipartisan majority of the House impeached Donald Trump on the grounds that he led an insurrection OKIsItJustMe Dec 29 #19
The opinion of one person on the internet does not equate to the Rule Of Law. Fiendish Thingy Dec 29 #21
U. S. Constitution.net: Trump and the 14th Amendment OKIsItJustMe Dec 28 #6
It no longer matters to Republicans what it right, or being loyal to the Constitution. lees1975 Dec 28 #12
Latest Discussions»Editorials & Other Articles»Congress has the power to...