Donald Trump at a campaign rally in Summerville, South Carolina, on September 25th. SAM WOLFE (Portal)
Three judges from three states, Minnesota, Michigan and Colorado, have struck down the efforts of those seeking to block Donald Trump from running in next year’s presidential election because of his role in the attack on the Capitol on January 6, 2021, a provision that contained in the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution.
The latest to do so was Judge Sarah Wallace this Friday evening, refusing to remove the former president’s name from the Republican primary in Colorado, two months before it begins in Iowa.
The Constitution does not prohibit anyone under investigation for a federal crime from becoming president; still strive for it, even though he faces, as is the case, 94 indictments in four separate cases for his alleged involvement in the attack on the Capitol, for election crimes and for his handling of classified papers. In the event that he ends up in prison, there is not even this reservation in the policy text.
However, the Fourteenth Amendment provides an exception in its third section known as the “Disqualification Clause,” which states: “No person shall do this.” […] president […] “if he, having previously taken an oath in support of the Constitution of the United States, has taken part in any insurrection or rebellion against it, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.” The text also warns that Congress may override this veto , if it reaches a two-thirds majority.
The amendment, passed in 1868, served to grant citizenship to any person “born or naturalized in the United States,” including those who had been enslaved, and to ensure the equality of all citizens before the law. The third phase was intended to prevent the reemergence of the Confederate rebels defeated in the Civil War (1861-1865). It has been used very rarely, only twice since 1919.
The Colorado judge based her decision on her interpretation that the Fourteenth Amendment does not apply to presidents. Their decision concludes that “on January 6, 2021, Trump participated in an insurrection that he incited.” He also doesn’t skimp on his reprimand, saying he knows that “[Su] inflammatory rhetoric [de aquel día]came from a speaker who routinely advocated political violence and had inflamed the anger of his supporters before certification [del triunfo legítimo de Biden]would likely cause immediate anarchy and disorder.”
Join EL PAÍS to follow all the news and read without restrictions.
Subscribe to
The third clause is about senators and congressmen, but not specifically about the office of president, Wallace believes. “After considering the arguments of both parties, this court is satisfied that the drafters of this text, for whatever reason, did not intend to include anyone who had taken the presidential oath,” he wrote in his argument.
For defenders of a legal theory defended in a 126-page academic article for the University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Friday marked the third splash of cold water in just over a week. It is entitled “The Extension and Strength of the Third Section” and is signed by William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulsen, two renowned conservative academics who argue that the disqualification clause is anything but a 19th-century anachronism and that it is not There are doubts about Trump’s actions. They fit your description.
The Minnesota Supreme Court reasoned that Trump could run in the primaries on the grounds that it was up to political parties to decide who appeared on their ballot papers. A few days later, a Michigan judge disregarded responsibility for deciding the matter, which he said falls to Congress.
Possibility of appeal
The Colorado plaintiffs can appeal the decision to the state Supreme Court and also take the case to Washington, which has a six-to-three conservative supermajority. Three of its members come from Trump’s years in the White House (2017-2021).
The lawsuit was filed by a Washington organization called Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics (CREW), which has experience in challenging Trump in court. In an interview with EL PAÍS last September, Donald Sherman, its vice president, stated: “There is overwhelming evidence that the clause can be activated in this case. “The concept is easy to understand, but the litigation will not be.” CREW last year secured enforcement of the clause that would bar Cuoy Griffin, founder of the group Cowboys for Trump, from holding public office in New Mexico.
“We welcome today’s ruling in Colorado, which represents another nail in the coffin of anti-American election challenges,” Trump spokesman Steven Cheung said in a statement Friday. “The voter has the constitutional right to vote for the candidate of his or her choice.”
The former president leads by a wide margin all polls on voting intentions to be nominated as the Republican Party candidate in the November 2024 elections.
Follow all international information on Facebook and Xor in our weekly newsletter.