The Constitution itself would suggest he's already barred from running. I am just hoping someone takes this up and actually challenges it in the courts well ahead of time. Disqualification comes the moment you're even brought to trial on sedition charges. This was incorporated language following the Civil War as there otherwise would have been too many people to disqualify individually through the litigation process ahead of future elections.
The corrupt supreme court has literally ruled that part of the text of the second amendment is the absolute unchallengable law of the land and another part just doesn't count. They don't just pick the cherries, they pit them as well.
I am just hoping someone takes this up and actually challenges it in the courts well ahead of time.
I personally know someone working to file suit against the state AG to bar trump from the ballot in their state, so there are things going on. Whether they're successful or not is anyone's guess.
My guess is "no, they won't be." The 14th may in fact bar someone from holding office, however, it's my personal belief the 5th and the 14th both require them to be convicted of said offenses to first trigger the bar
The 14th may in fact bar someone from holding office, however, it's my personal belief the 5th and the 14th both require them to be convicted of said offenses to first trigger the bar.
When the 14th amendment was passed, it was interpreted quite broadly to mean anyone who was involved in the Confederacy, in any capacity. It had nothing to do with any conviction. And in 1872, Congress passed an "amnesty act" limiting the restrictions to politicians and military officers, implying that even grunts in the Confederate army were deemed disqualified until the act passed.
The 14th also contains the due process clause which would seem to require some form of court process before precluding anyone from participating in their right to seek office.
I am rather with you on that. Barring him prior to any court proceedings sets a bad precedent. It would also rile up his supporters and they would have some legitimacy in their arguments.
Ugh. If the Senate had followed through with the impeachment he'd have been barred already. My dad's a hardcore Republican and agrees the fucker is dangerous to democracy. I'm more worried at this point that his trials will align with the election and he'll stir up another more deadly riot.
I would not be surprised to learn that several Democrats in power did not want to convict him because they expected him to turn the Republican primary into a shitshow and they benefit personally from the chaos.
To be certain. I lean right for most policy. But not a single issue voter. Trump is a total shit show. Been banned from conservative groups because I will mention that. But both sides don't want the opposition to have good leadership. They do their best to take down any good leaders.