[Robert DeLong]

And Congress includes the combination of House of Representatives and the Senate. So are you saying the President can indeed use the insurrection act here to refuse usage of the ballots from those states?

[JohnBovenmyer]

The posted language is certainly in the Constitution and was put there by folks who understood very well insurrection and rebellion. Moreover it didn't say it was 'just' applicable to the recently passed insurrection. There had to be some into for this clause to provide future proofing for the country. Its Framers would intend it to be used in present circumstances. The scope and power of the clause is vast, but its mechanics were left to Congress to specify via Section 5. But I haven't been able to find what, if any, legally active enabling legislation for it exist.

Trump's legal team really needs to dig into this as it potentially offers the equivalent of W closing the skies on 911. Can POTUS or SCOTUS act based on the language of the amendment alone? I don't know. Supremacy clause implies those in violation should not be serving. Normally I'd expect some kind of due process for such major effects. But Due Process has its roots in the Bill of Rights and this arguably amends that... Yet the politics of applying it would be much cleaner through following pre-existing, albeit mostly forgotten, Congressional enabling scaffolding.