Posted on 09/18/2023 1:21:33 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
Steven Calabresi – the law professor who co-founded the conservative Federalist Society legal organization – has conceded that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment does not in fact bar former President Donald Trump from the presidential ballot, despite claiming in a much-hyped op-ed from August that this was the case.
The Northwestern University law professor had been an outspoken proponent of the legal theory that Trump was barred from running for office on the grounds that he incited an insurrection on January 6th, 2021 – in violation of a Civil War era constitutional provision. It’s an initially floated by law professors William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulsen, with Calabresi quickly popularizing it.
Historically, Section 3 of the 14th Amendment was meant to prevent former members of the Confederacy from holding office after the Civil War. The provision, cited by Calabresi, states that anyone who has taken an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution “…as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State..” and subsequently engages in insurrection or rebellion against the United States cannot then hold federal or state office.
The three men were originally in agreement that “an officer of the United States” included individuals elected as either President or Vice-President. However, Calabresi now says he believes that the President and Vice-President are not, due to “a technicality in the drafting of the disqualification clause of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment”, “officers” – that term being reserved for positions appointed by the President, rather than the President himself.
Additionally he concedes the events of January 6th do not constitute an ‘insurrection’. Calabresi credits former U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey with changing his mind.
New Hampshire Secretary of State David Scanlan has already rejected calls to disqualify Trump, via the 14th Amendment, from the state’s ballot.
bkmk
Insurrection is burning buildings, destruction of public and private property, IN A WORD, BLM and ANTIFA activities! PUT them in jail!
The US has already had several insurrections. The most recent one was in 1933.
“defend the Constitution
engages in insurrection or rebellion against the United States”
The First allows for the Second.
If the “Government of The United States” is Corrupt, the First Duty is to the Constitution, to fight the corruption, not to meekly go along.
See: Battle of Athens.
Once again, academic pedigree/education/letters after your name do not automatically confer intelligence.
Dumbass.
The US has already had several insurrections. The most recent one was in 1933.
*****************
I think Bush invoked the Insurrection Act in 1992.
No kidding. Not only do they not agree with anyone else; they don't seem to agree with themselves on different days. He still thinks President Trump should lose, though - natch!
Fire prof for being too stupid to give the correct answer the first time.
I’m a scholar!
Fire the missiles!
Oh wait, don’t have fired them!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.