How Would You Decide
If An Elected Official Should Be Disqualified to Run?
I thought it took people a long time to notice that the Constitution has rules against insurrectionists and those who aid insurrectionists running for office. But when the words were finally noticed, there was a great deal of confusion.
Frankly, I don’t see much reason for confusion. The Constitution is, in many places, vague. But not here.
The 14th Amendment, Section 3
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
It’s very clear. Anyone who has held any office in the federal or state government and has taken an oath to support the U.S. Constitution, and has engaged in insurrection or given aid or comfort to insurrectionists is ineligible to hold office in the federal or state governments.
So, the test would be this:
- Did the person hold an office in State or Federal government requiring an oath to support the Constitution?
- Did the person engage in insurrection or provide aid or comfort to insurrectionists?
- If both are true, the person is ineligible for office. That person must immediately relinquish any office held and cannot run for office in the future — except if 2/3 of both legislative branches vote to remove that requirement.
What about the objections?
- [Name of person] did not engage in insurrection or provide aid or comfort to insurrectionists.
This has some credibility except when we have video and audio and many eyewitnesses that show the person actually engaging in or providing aid and comfort to insurrectionists. - There is no mechanism for enforcement.
This one is really interesting. Because all of those government officials take an oath to support the Constitution and that responsibility is a key part of their job descriptions. Any election official who gets an application from someone who engaged in or supported insurrection has a Constitutional duty to deny that person a place on the ballot. In other words, to meet their obligations, election officials don’t need to do a thing; they just need to NOT violate their oaths by putting that person on the ballot.
While all those (easily rebutted) points get a lot of attention, something of more immediate significance has been completely ignored. Look again at the wording:
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office…
It doesn’t say that an insurrectionists (or insurrection supporter) officeholder cannot run for re-election. It says that such a person cannot hold office. That means that Madison Cawthorn should be removed from office immediately, and that elected officials who allow him to continue in office are violating their oaths to the Constitution.
Frankly, the Democrats in Congress who call on Cawthorn, and other accomplices to the insurrection, are guilty whenever they allow him to act as a legitimate elected official or count his vote. And, of course, the GOPers who look the other way are similarly guilty.
Of course, any election official who allows Trump’s name to go on a ballot in 2024 would be similarly guilty. In fact, Trump should have been removed from office by January 6, 2021.
There is a clear Constitutional guide and a clear set of people who are responsible for upholding the Constitution. Insurrectionist and insurrection supporters must be removed immediately and never allowed back on a ballot (except if BOTH legislative branches vote by 2/3 to allow that person on the ballot).
Tell me where I’m wrong.
