The U.S. Constitution explicitly prohibits individuals who have engaged in insurrection from holding public office, as stated in Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. This section declares that anyone who has sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution and subsequently participated in or supported insurrection is disqualified from office unless Congress removes this restriction with a two-thirds majority vote in both chambers. The foundation for this disqualification lies in allegiance to the Constitution, not merely the government. Evidence strongly suggests that former President Donald Trump engaged in such insurrection, a conclusion affirmed by three separate proceedings.
The first significant instance was Trump’s second impeachment trial in January 2021, where he was charged with “incitement of insurrection.” Although the Senate majority voted for conviction, the required two-thirds majority to remove him from office was not achieved. The charge of incitement aligns closely with the constitutional grounds for disqualification under Section 3. The second case occurred during a Colorado court hearing, which concluded that Trump had engaged in insurrection as defined by the 14th Amendment. While the U.S. Supreme Court later ruled that states lack the authority to disqualify federal candidates, it left the determination of Trump’s actions untouched. Lastly, the bipartisan House Select Committee investigating the January 6 Capitol attack presented overwhelming evidence, including testimony from Republican witnesses, showing Trump’s involvement in insurrectionary acts, such as pressuring Vice President Mike Pence to reject Electoral College votes unlawfully.
Critics argue that a Supreme Court decision in the Colorado case, Trump v. Anderson, prevents Congress from invoking Section 3 to disqualify Trump. However, this claim is unfounded. The court’s remarks about requiring new federal legislation to enforce Section 3 are non-binding dicta, meaning they are not legal precedents. Furthermore, the Constitution explicitly grants Congress the authority to manage the Electoral College vote count, a process beyond judicial review. Existing legislation, such as the Electoral Count Act, provides a framework for addressing objections to electoral votes, including those cast for constitutionally disqualified candidates.
The Electoral Count Act allows Congress to reject votes deemed “not regularly given,” a criterion that applies to votes for candidates disqualified under the Constitution. If Trump’s votes were excluded, the threshold for electing a president would decrease, potentially altering the outcome. While it is unlikely that Republicans in Congress would support actions that could lead to Vice President Kamala Harris assuming the presidency, Democrats have a constitutional duty to challenge any Electoral College votes for a disqualified candidate. Upholding this duty is essential to preserving the integrity of the Constitution.
Congress now faces a pivotal decision. By acting decisively to enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, lawmakers can reaffirm their commitment to the Constitution and ensure that no individual who has violated its principles holds the nation’s highest office. Failure to act would set a dangerous precedent, undermining the rule of law and the foundational principles of American demo
cracy.