Opinion columnists at The Hill have called on Congress to invoke the disqualification clause of the 14th Amendment to prevent President-elect Donald Trump from taking office next month.
in column Published on Thursday, Evan A. Davis and David M. Schulte argued that the 14th Amendment allows Congress to object to the electoral votes because it considers President Trump an “oath-breaking insurrectionist.” .
Trump returns: Washington prepares for second term
Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits former officials who have “engaged in rebellion” or “gave aid or comfort to the enemy” from holding public office again. This restriction can be lifted by a two-thirds vote in each chamber.
U.S. President-elect Donald Trump looks on at Turning Point USA's America Fest held at the Phoenix Convention Center on December 22, 2024 in Phoenix, Arizona. (Rebecca Noble/Getty Images)
Davis, former editor-in-chief of the Columbia Law Review, and Schulte, former editor-in-chief of the Yale Law Journal, cited this disqualification to argue that Trump is unfit to be president. They called on Congress to take action when it meets next week in a joint session to officially count the electors.
“Disqualification is based on insurrection against the Constitution, not the government. The evidence that Donald Trump engaged in such insurrection is overwhelming,” they argued. “This issue was decided in three separate forums, two of which were fully contested with the active participation of Mr. Trump's lawyers.”
The authors discuss Trump's second impeachment trial, Congress' investigation of the January 6 attack on the Capitol, and Colorado Supreme Court The court ruled that the former president and the president-elect were ineligible to participate in the state's 2024 ballot.
“On January 13, 2021, then-President Trump was impeached on the charge of “incitement of insurrection.'' Inciting an insurrection includes “participating in an insurrection,'' which violates the Constitution, or aiding an enemy of the Constitution. They argued that the grounds for disqualification are clearly specified in the Constitution, “Section 3.''
“The inescapable conclusion from this evidence is that President Trump committed an unconstitutional insurrection.”
Colorado's decision to exclude President Trump from voting based on 14th Amendment disqualification was overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court, but “President Trump, as those terms are used in Sec. There was clear and convincing evidence of involvement in the insurrection. Three,” Davis and Schulte wrote.
President-elect Trump attended America Fest in Arizona. (Rick Scutelli)
However, that decision was appealed, and the Supreme Court ruled in Trump's favor, concluding that “states have no constitutional authority to enforce Article III with respect to federal offices, particularly the office of the President.”
Still, Davis and Schulte complained that “the court did not address the finding that Trump was involved in the insurrection,'' and that the Supreme Court's decision in this case means that Congress must convene on January 6th to vote electoral votes. It was argued that this does not preclude refusal.
Trump takes another step toward becoming president after Electoral College vote
“The counting of Electoral College votes is a matter uniquely assigned to Congress by the Constitution. Because rejection of a vote for constitutional reasons is an unreviewable political matter, it is a well-established “Under the law, this fact deprives the Supreme Court of its right to speak,” they argued.
The columnists told Congress that they would only allow objections “if a state's electors are not legally certified or if one or more electors' votes are not 'regularly' cast.” They called on Congress to reject the electoral votes using the election counting method that was used in the election.
“A vote for a constitutionally disqualified candidate clearly follows the normal use of the words 'not regularly given,'” they argued. “Disqualification for participating in an insurrection is no different from disqualification based on other constitutional requirements, such as age, citizenship at birth, or 14 years of residence in the United States.”
A challenge under the Counts Act requires a petition signed by 20 percent of members in each chamber.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
US Capitol dome seen from a perch in Washington DC (Fox News Digital)
“If a dissenting opinion is supported by a majority vote in each chamber, the vote will not be counted and the number of votes needed to win will be reduced by the number of disqualified votes.If all votes for Mr. Trump are not counted, Kamala Harris will be elected 'President,''' they wrote.
“It is clear that Congressional Republicans are unlikely to elect Ms. Harris as president,” they concluded. “But Democrats need to take a stand against the Electoral College voting for persons who are disqualified by the Constitution, unless and until this obstacle is removed. The same is required by the oath to support and defend.”
The column quickly drew intense backlash online, with critics accusing the authors of “supporting rebellion.”
“Oh, look! Democrats want to steal the election and override the will of the American people. They are a threat to democracy,” Trump campaign spokesman Stephen Chan wrote to X.
“You guys are sick,” Eric Trump responded.
”Looks like @thehill supports the rebellion. That's right, try blocking the inauguration of a president who wins the popular vote and the Electoral College. Let’s see what happens to you guys,” said anti-woke activist Robbie Starbuck.
“This article amounts to a conspiracy to overturn the 2024 election,” posted Will Chamberlain, senior advisor for the Article III Project.
Political comedian Tim Young also weighed in: “@thehill In a fantasy world, Democrats on The Hill think they can stop Trump from taking office.”
Kevin and Keith Hodge, known as the Hodge Twins, responded: “This is a real rebellion against the will of the people.”
“This sounds very rebellious,” agreed journalist Ian Miles Chong.
“Writs were executed on people who said far less than this about Biden in 2021,” says conservative commentator. Posted by John Cardillo.
Former presidential candidate: “Democrats must reject Trump's victory in a fair democratic process, nonsense like this.'' John Delaney wrote:. “Democrats should work with him when it's in the best interest of the country and their voters, or stand firm when it's not. Americans don't want a pure obstructionist.”
