[rxsid]

"and Congress can’t override the plain language of the US Constitution, which says that a sitting President can only be removed by impeachment or the 25th amendment process. "

"President." As in, "legally" President. That's the key term.

This has nothing to do with Congress "overriding" the Constitution.

Quo Warranto is there to allow challenges to the legitimacy of the person holding office in D.C. (i.e. not just office of President), that they are holding office without authority due to fraud, etc. Therefore, they are a usurper and not actually, legally President.

Chapter 35. Quo Warranto
Subchapter I. Actions Against Officers of the United States.

A quo warranto may be issued from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in the name of the United States against a person who within the District of Columbia usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises, a franchise conferred by the United States or a public office of the United States, civil or military. The proceedings shall be deemed a civil action.

https://code.dccouncil.us/dc/council/code/titles/16/chapters/35/#:~:text=%C2%A7%2016%E2%80%933544.&text=In%20a%20quo%20warranto%20proceeding,if%20either%20party%20requests%20it.

Boiling it down...

Impeachment is used to remove a President who was legally sworn in.
A Writ of Quo Warranto is used to remove a person who was illegally sworn into the office.

Now, whether Trump...or anyone else injured by the election fraud, files a Quo Warranto and whether we truly have a fair and equitable justice system is an entirely different matter.

[Boogieman]

“As in, “legally” President.”

According to the SUPREME law of the land, the President that is inaugurated is legally President.

Congress can’t just pass a law to override the Constitution, or they could just vote any President out with a simple majority instead of going through impeachment.