The only question is whether American citizens today can uphold that commitment.
By J. Michael Luttig and Laurence H. Tribe
As students of the United States Constitution for many decades—one of us as a U.S. Court of Appeals judge, the other as a professor of constitutional law, and both as constitutional advocates, scholars, and practitioners—we long ago came to the conclusion that the Fourteenth Amendment, the amendment ratified in 1868 that represents our nation’s second founding and a new birth of freedom, contains within it a protection against the dissolution of the republic by a treasonous president.
This protection, embodied in the amendment’s often-overlooked Section 3, automatically excludes from future office and position of power in the United States government—and also from any equivalent office and position of power in the sovereign states and their subdivisions—any person who has taken an oath to support and defend our Constitution and thereafter rebels against that sacred charter, either through overt insurrection or by giving aid or comfort to the Constitution’s enemies.
This protection, embodied in the amendment’s often-overlooked Section 3, automatically excludes from future office and position of power in the United States government—and also from any equivalent office and position of power in the sovereign states and their subdivisions—any person who has taken an oath to support and defend our Constitution and thereafter rebels against that sacred charter, either through overt insurrection or by giving aid or comfort to the Constitution’s enemies.
Rep. Eric Swalwell to testify in Trump 14th Amendment disqualification trial...
A lawyer for Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), which brought the case, said Monday that Swalwell will explain “how the mob” that attacked the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, “disrupted the core constitutional process of a peaceful transfer of power.”
C-SPAN: Former President Trump 14th Amendment Hearing in Colorado, Part 1
Lawyers present opening arguments in a case to determine whether the 14th Amendment’s “insurrectionist ban” can be used to prevent former President Donald Trump from appearing on Colorado’s presidential election ballots.
A lawyer for Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), which brought the case, said Monday that Swalwell will explain “how the mob” that attacked the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, “disrupted the core constitutional process of a peaceful transfer of power.”
Lawyers present opening arguments in a case to determine whether the 14th Amendment’s “insurrectionist ban” can be used to prevent former President Donald Trump from appearing on Colorado’s presidential election ballots.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?531489-1/president-trump-14th-amendment-hearing-colorado-part-1
A Growing Chorus of Conservative Legal Scholars Say Trump Should Be Barred From Presidency.
The argument isn’t just coming from the left.
In The Atlantic this weekend, former federal judge J. Michael Luttig and professor of constitutional law Laurence H. Tribe chimed in with their version of an argument continuing to gain traction among legal scholars that the Fourteenth Amendment excludes Trump from holding office again at any level. According to Luttig and Tribe, the Fourteenth Amendment’s Section 3 bars any person who has previously taken an oath to support the Constitution in an official capacity and who later “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against the Constitution from holding an official office again.
%20(1).jpg)
.jpg)
%20(1).jpg)
