In America, the principle of “Innocent until proven guilty” has long been upheld as a fundamental right. However, this right is now being challenged by anti-Trump groups who are determined to disqualify Donald Trump, the leading Republican candidate for president. These groups are urging state election officials to remove Trump from the ballot, citing an obscure clause in the 14th Amendment that disqualifies individuals who have engaged in insurrection against the United States from holding public office.
The problem with this argument is that Trump has never been convicted of insurrection, and none of his prosecutors are charging him with insurrection either. The House of Representatives impeached him on this charge, but he was ultimately acquitted. So, despite zero convictions and one acquittal, groups like Free Speech For People are still labeling Trump an insurrectionist and demanding his removal from the ballot.
Under this scheme, Trump would have to go to court and prove his innocence in order to be on the ballot. This flips the presumption of innocence on its head, which is not in line with American values. Regardless of whether one likes or dislikes Trump, this should be a cause for concern. In fact, George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley has called it “the single most dangerous constitutional theory I’ve seen in decades.”
The consequences of this ploy could be far-reaching. It could potentially create chaos during the upcoming presidential primaries as states face lawsuits over Trump’s presence on the ballot. New Hampshire’s secretary of state and attorney general are currently reviewing the legal issues involved. Ultimately, any attempt to remove Trump from the ballot would likely end up before the US Supreme Court.
It is worth noting that Free Speech For People President John Bonifaz has worked closely with Rep. Jamie Raskin, the lead manager in Trump’s second impeachment trial. Raskin and Democrats failed to convict Trump at that time, so resorting to the “insurrection clause” is a way to achieve what they couldn’t constitutionally. This kind of partisan manipulation of constitutional clauses undermines the integrity of our democracy.
It is not only anti-Trump groups on the left who are pushing this narrative, but also some on the right, such as Asa Hutchinson, who labeled Trump an “insurrectionist” during a Republican debate. However, the “insurrection clause” was originally added to the Constitution to disqualify Confederate officeholders and military leaders after the Civil War, and it was subsequently ruled as not being sufficient to disqualify anyone from office by Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase in 1869. This ruling remains the federal precedent.
Attempts to reinterpret Chase’s ruling by citing a forthcoming University of Pennsylvania Law Review article or the opinion of Harvard Law emeritus professor Laurence Tribe are simply trying to overturn precedent, which is not a valid argument. Precedent should be respected, regardless of ivory-tower opinions.
Furthermore, there have been historical examples that contradict the argument that insurrection disqualifies individuals from running for office. Socialist Eugene V. Debs, for instance, went to prison in 1918 for inciting resistance against the US Army, but he was not convicted of insurrection. Yet, he was still nominated for president by the Socialist Party in 1920 and appeared on the ballot in 40 states. It is hypocritical to apply the “insurrection clause” selectively.
One encouraging example comes from Georgia, where Free Speech For People attempted to get Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene removed from the ballot using the insurrection clause. However, Judge Charles Beaudrot ruled that there was insufficient evidence to prove she had engaged in insurrection, emphasizing the importance of distinguishing between heated political rhetoric and a call to violent revolution.
While the events of January 6th were regrettable, it is crucial to remember that they pale in comparison to the devastating loss of 750,000 American lives during the Civil War. The attempt to remove Trump from the ballot using the insurrection clause is profoundly anti-democratic. Instead of resorting to such tactics, anti-Trump groups should focus on winning over voters through effective policies and respecting principles like due process and the presumption of innocence, which are the bedrock of our nation’s exceptionalism.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
