Currently making the rounds in media and political circles, discussions about Donald Trump and the disqualification clause of the US Constitution:
At issue is whether this section of the Constitution means Donald Trump cannot run again for president. Ever. Or for any other federal or state office.
Some sources contend that this section was written immediately after the Civil War and ratified in 1868, and is not applicable today. They insist it was intended only to prohibit from office those who fought against the Union in that war.
There’s no ambiguity here, no exception, no time limitation. The words are still there. The meanings of “insurrection” and “rebellion” have not evolved or changed since the Civil War. And taking an oath to support the Constitution means the same thing today as it did then.
For those interested, one of the most comprehensive discussions of this issue appears in The Atlantic. Also excellent and a shorter, less scholarly, article: “The case for Donald Trump’s disqualification under the 14th Amendment,” from CREW, the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.
Both sides in the issue want to get the matter into court, hoping to appeal it to the Supreme Court and get a ruling before Trump’s name gets on ballots across the country next year. But time is short and it’s Trump’s court, with three of the conservative justices indebted to him for their appointments, so the outcome is anything but certain. At the very least it will test the court’s devotion to the Constitution instead of Trump. At most, it could disqualify Donald Trump from the 2024 presidential race … and from all future runs for office.
In the meantime, Section 3 is enforceable through civil lawsuits challenging a candidate’s eligibility to hold office. Or, in the alternative and as stated in the Constitution, a two-thirds vote in both the House and Senate could absolve Trump from the disqualification.
The plot thickens.