Replies

I do think the discussion of the 14th Amendment in the post CW context is interesting.

As I understand it....many people urged Jefferson Davis to run again for the Senate. He didn’t want to serve, and he didn’t want to do anything to seek “permission” to run as it were, and (I believe) he had been demoted to non-citizenship status (which would have made him ineligible to serve in the Senate, right?). But of course stripping him of citizenship was never adjudicated - I think it was just done administratively. He was indicted for treason, but never tried...as neither side wanted to risk a trial.

It’s interesting as civil war (I’m just using that term for discussion purposes) is basically a non-recognized legal activity. There is nothing legal about it. It’s just an outbreak of violence. So establishing/re-establishing legal norms is not easy and looking back at it, you can say “well, that wasn’t legal” and you’d be correct.

In any event...I don’t think it is settled as to whether Jeff Davis “could” have served in the Senate had a southern legislature sent him there. He had not been “convicted” of treason or insurrection. But he was also sort of not eligible because he wasn’t a citizen. (His citizenship was restored in 1978).

This is somewhat relevant to the CO discussion....because obviously only the media has accused Trump of “insurrection”. They are just flat out wrong on this. But there’s not a lot of litigation/decisions on how to stop insurrectionists from serving in public office.

I’d love to hear from better historians and appelate Constitutional lawyers on this. Thank you.