Growing number of legal scholars argue that Trump should be disqualified from presidency based on constitutional grounds

Conservative legal scholars are making a case that former President Donald Trump should be disqualified from running for president in 2024 due to his efforts to overturn the previous election result. Prominent conservative J. Michael Luttig and liberal law professor Laurence Tribe argue that Trump’s actions, including the January 6 insurrection at the US Capitol, fall within the ambit of the 14th Amendment’s disqualification clause. This provision bars individuals who have engaged in insurrection or rebellion from holding future office. Luttig and Tribe contend that a conviction is not necessary to disqualify Trump, as his attempts to overturn the election and the resulting attack on the Capitol make him ineligible to serve as president again.

Their argument is gaining traction, with two members of the Federalist Society, a legal organization influential among conservative legal thinkers, publishing a law review article supporting the disqualification. Those law professors, William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulsen, assert that Trump’s role in the attempted overthrow of the 2020 election and the events leading to the January 6 attack make a strong case for his disqualification.

Baude and Paulsen highlight Trump’s speech on January 6, in which he falsely claimed the election was stolen and called on his supporters to take action to block the transfer of power. They argue that Trump’s deliberate inaction during the insurrection further incriminates him, as it undermines any claim that the crowd’s reaction was a mistake or misunderstanding.

The professors also argue that current and former officeholders who supported or planned efforts to overturn the election should face scrutiny if they seek future public office. They claim that Trump’s overall conduct disqualifies him from candidacy, regardless of whether he faces criminal charges or civil conspiracy lawsuits related to the election.

Baude and Paulsen consider the historical intentions behind the 14th Amendment’s disqualification clause, which aimed to prevent former Confederates from holding office after the Civil War. They assert that the threat posed by the Capitol attack and Trump’s attempt to hold onto power is as serious as the Civil War, noting that more people died and were injured during the insurrection than in the Battle of Fort Sumter that triggered the war.

While the articles from legal scholars currently represent opinions, it is possible that state court systems could be asked to evaluate Trump’s eligibility as a candidate in 2024. Secretaries of state or other officials may disqualify Trump from their states’ ballots, potentially leading to a Supreme Court decision on the matter.

Luttig and Tribe acknowledge that the process of determining Trump’s eligibility could lead to social unrest and violence. They argue, however, that failing to engage in the constitutionally mandated process would also have serious consequences.

Previously, advocacy groups attempted to disqualify Republican members of Congress Marjorie Taylor Green and Madison Cawthorn from being ballot candidates in 2022 based on the 14th Amendment. However, judges ruled that neither could be disqualified. In a separate case, a convicted Capitol rioter, Couy Griffin, was removed from an elected county office in New Mexico.

Original Story at www.cnn.com – 2023-08-19 15:10:00