this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2023
32 points (100.0% liked)

Politics

19 readers
1 users here now

@politics on kbin.social is a magazine to share and discuss current events news, opinion/analysis, videos, or other informative content related to politicians, politics, or policy-making at all levels of governance (federal, state, local), both domestic and international. Members of all political perspectives are welcome here, though we run a tight ship. Community guidelines and submission rules were co-created between the Mod Team and early members of @politics. Please read all community guidelines and submission rules carefully before engaging our magazine.

founded 2 years ago
 

The 14th Amendment to the Constitution bans anyone who “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against” the U.S. from holding office.

A Florida lawyer is suing Donald Trump in an attempt to disqualify his current run for president. Lawrence A. Caplan’s Thursday lawsuit claims that the ex-president’s involvement in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot would make him ineligible to run again, thanks to the Constitution’s 14th Amendment—a Civil War-era addition aimed at preventing those who “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against” the U.S. from holding office. “Now given that the facts seem to be crystal clear that Trump was involved to some extent in the insurrection that took place on January 6th, the sole remaining question is whether American jurists who swear an oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution upon their entry to the bench, will choose to follow the letter of the Constitution in this case,” the lawsuit says, also citing Trump’s alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election results in Georgia. Legal experts say it’s an uphill battle to argue in court, since the amendment has hardly been exercised in modern history. “Realistically, it’s not a Hail Mary, but it’s just tossing the ball up and hoping it lands in the right place,” Charles Zelden, a professor of history and legal studies at Nova Southeastern University, told the South Florida Sun Sentinel.

archive link to South Florida Sun Sentinel article: https://archive.ph/1BntD

top 4 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TheBaldFox@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I'm sure he ruling will be that he has no "standing" to bring suit.

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.one 2 points 1 year ago

I don't think it will even get as far as standing.

The difference between Trump and the other guy removed from office because of 1/6:

https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics/judge-removes-local-official-engaging-jan-insurrection/story?id=89463597

Is that that guy had actually been convicted. Hasn't happened for Trump... yet.

My expectation would be that because Trump's case has not yet been adjudicated, he still has the premise of innocent until proven guilty, and until such time, he's still qualified.

[–] gentleman@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

@TheBaldFox After the abortion ruling (denial of cert if I recall) where doctors who don’t get to see babies have standing, it will be a pretzel twist to for the SC to get around that. If a better plaintiff comes along there may be a shot.

@uphillbothways

[–] mookulator@mander.xyz 2 points 1 year ago

I doubt it’ll work, but the fact that it’s in Florida is big. If he gets disqualified there, he has almost no path to the white house.