
Former President Donald Trump appears at an event hosted by the South Carolina Republican Party on August 5, 2023 in Columbia, South Carolina.
Conservative Legal Scholars Argue Trump Is Disqualified for Office Under 14th Amendment
"Donald Trump cannot be president—cannot run for president, cannot become president, cannot hold office—unless two-thirds of Congress decides to grant him amnesty for his conduct on January 6."
A pair of conservative legal scholars argue in a newly released paper that, under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, former President Donald Trump is disqualified to hold office again, echoing a case long made by progressive experts and watchdogs.
In an in-depth analysis of Section 3, William Baude of the University of Chicago and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St. Thomas contend that the clause "remains of direct and dramatic relevance today" even though it arose from "a particular historical situation and acute problem arising in the aftermath of the Civil War"—namely, the decision by Southern states to send supporters of secession and rebellion to Congress.
"Fast-forward a century and a half. The events surrounding efforts to overturn the result of the presidential election of 2020 have sparked renewed scholarly, judicial, and political interest in Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment," noted Baude and Paulsen, both active members of the right-wing Federalist Society. "Several of the people involved in these events—most notably the defeated president, Donald Trump—had previously taken oaths to support the Constitution."
"If they engaged in or gave aid and comfort to an insurrection against the constitutional government," they added, "Section 3 would appear to bar them from holding office again."
Trump, the frontrunner in the 2024 Republican presidential primary, is currently facing a number of felony charges stemming from his role in attempting to overturn the 2020 presidential election and inciting the January 6, 2021 insurrection, including conspiracy to defraud the United States and "conspiracy against the right to vote and to have one's vote counted."
Special Counsel Jack Smith, who laid out the charges last week in a 45-page indictment, has proposed a January 2, 2024 trial date.
But legal experts and historians have argued that Trump is disqualified for office under Section 3 whether or not he is convicted.
The clause states that "no person shall be a senator or representative in Congress, or elector of president and vice president, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, 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, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof."
Only a two-thirds vote by both chambers of Congress can lift the disqualification.
"Trump is disqualified from holding any public office, including the office of the president, under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment."
In their new paper, Baude and Paulsen wrote that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment—known as the insurrection clause—is "self-executing, operating as an immediate disqualification from office, without the need for additional action by Congress."
"It can and should be enforced by every official, state or federal, who judges qualifications," Baude and Paulsen argued, rejecting the notion that the First Amendment shields those who have engaged in or incited insurrection from disqualification under Section 3.
The clause, the pair added, "covers a broad range of former offices, including the presidency. And in particular, it disqualifies former President Donald Trump, and potentially many others, because of their participation in the attempted overthrow of the 2020 presidential election."
John Bonifaz, co-founder and president of Free Speech for People, called the new paper a "must-read for every secretary of state" and "chief election official in the country."
"As this article makes clear, they must follow the mandate of 14.3 [and] bar Trump from the ballot," Bonifaz wrote. "If they do not, we will sue."
Free Speech for People is one of several advocacy groups preparing to take legal action if Trump is not disqualified.
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington argued in a report that "overwhelming evidence establishes that President Trump was the central cause of and a participant in the insurrection. Because of that, Trump is disqualified from holding any public office, including the office of the president, under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment."
Last September, a New Mexico judge ordered the removal of a county commissioner who took part in the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. The decision marked the first time since 1869 that a court disqualified a public official under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
In an
interview with
The New York Times on Thursday, Paulsen suggested the new paper could bolster "a lawsuit presenting a vital constitutional issue that potentially the Supreme Court would want to hear and decide."
Baude, the paper's other co-author, summarized the pair's conclusion to the Times: "Donald Trump cannot be president—cannot run for president, cannot become president, cannot hold office—unless two-thirds of Congress decides to grant him amnesty for his conduct on January 6."
We are at a crossroads
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. In a few short weeks, US voters will have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. Our Fall Campaign is underway, and we need your help. To power our newsroom through the rest of the year, we need to raise $125,000 by midnight on October 31. So if you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |
A pair of conservative legal scholars argue in a newly released paper that, under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, former President Donald Trump is disqualified to hold office again, echoing a case long made by progressive experts and watchdogs.
In an in-depth analysis of Section 3, William Baude of the University of Chicago and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St. Thomas contend that the clause "remains of direct and dramatic relevance today" even though it arose from "a particular historical situation and acute problem arising in the aftermath of the Civil War"—namely, the decision by Southern states to send supporters of secession and rebellion to Congress.
"Fast-forward a century and a half. The events surrounding efforts to overturn the result of the presidential election of 2020 have sparked renewed scholarly, judicial, and political interest in Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment," noted Baude and Paulsen, both active members of the right-wing Federalist Society. "Several of the people involved in these events—most notably the defeated president, Donald Trump—had previously taken oaths to support the Constitution."
"If they engaged in or gave aid and comfort to an insurrection against the constitutional government," they added, "Section 3 would appear to bar them from holding office again."
Trump, the frontrunner in the 2024 Republican presidential primary, is currently facing a number of felony charges stemming from his role in attempting to overturn the 2020 presidential election and inciting the January 6, 2021 insurrection, including conspiracy to defraud the United States and "conspiracy against the right to vote and to have one's vote counted."
Special Counsel Jack Smith, who laid out the charges last week in a 45-page indictment, has proposed a January 2, 2024 trial date.
But legal experts and historians have argued that Trump is disqualified for office under Section 3 whether or not he is convicted.
The clause states that "no person shall be a senator or representative in Congress, or elector of president and vice president, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, 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, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof."
Only a two-thirds vote by both chambers of Congress can lift the disqualification.
"Trump is disqualified from holding any public office, including the office of the president, under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment."
In their new paper, Baude and Paulsen wrote that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment—known as the insurrection clause—is "self-executing, operating as an immediate disqualification from office, without the need for additional action by Congress."
"It can and should be enforced by every official, state or federal, who judges qualifications," Baude and Paulsen argued, rejecting the notion that the First Amendment shields those who have engaged in or incited insurrection from disqualification under Section 3.
The clause, the pair added, "covers a broad range of former offices, including the presidency. And in particular, it disqualifies former President Donald Trump, and potentially many others, because of their participation in the attempted overthrow of the 2020 presidential election."
John Bonifaz, co-founder and president of Free Speech for People, called the new paper a "must-read for every secretary of state" and "chief election official in the country."
"As this article makes clear, they must follow the mandate of 14.3 [and] bar Trump from the ballot," Bonifaz wrote. "If they do not, we will sue."
Free Speech for People is one of several advocacy groups preparing to take legal action if Trump is not disqualified.
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington argued in a report that "overwhelming evidence establishes that President Trump was the central cause of and a participant in the insurrection. Because of that, Trump is disqualified from holding any public office, including the office of the president, under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment."
Last September, a New Mexico judge ordered the removal of a county commissioner who took part in the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. The decision marked the first time since 1869 that a court disqualified a public official under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
In an
interview with
The New York Times on Thursday, Paulsen suggested the new paper could bolster "a lawsuit presenting a vital constitutional issue that potentially the Supreme Court would want to hear and decide."
Baude, the paper's other co-author, summarized the pair's conclusion to the Times: "Donald Trump cannot be president—cannot run for president, cannot become president, cannot hold office—unless two-thirds of Congress decides to grant him amnesty for his conduct on January 6."
- 'Disqualify Trump' Ad Calls Out GOP Enablers as He Skips First 2024 Debate ›
- 'Trump Is Ineligible': Top Election Officials Urged to Bar Former President From Ballot ›
- Opinion | The Right-Wing Judge Who Could Tank the Most Slam-Dunk Case Against Trump | Common Dreams ›
- Watchdog Sues to Keep Trump Off Ballot in Colorado, Citing 14th Amendment ›
- Minnesota Voters File 14th Amendment Suit to Keep Trump Off Ballot ›
- Citing 14th Amendment, Michigan Voters File Suit to Bar Trump From 2024 Ballot ›
- Minnesotans Vow to Still 'Stand Up for Our Democracy' After Court Keeps Trump on Ballot ›
- Group Vows to 'Immediately' Appeal After Michigan Judge Lets Trump Stay on Ballot ›
- Colorado Judge Says Trump 'Incited' Jan 6 Attack—But Keeps Him on Ballot ›
- Colorado Supreme Court Disqualifies 'Insurrectionist' Trump from 2024 Ballot ›
- Opinion | Trump Led an Insurrection and a Court Is Right to Bar Him Under the 14th Amendment | Common Dreams ›
- 'He Is Not Qualified': Maine Bars Trump From Primary Ballot ›
- Maine, Colorado Officials Face Threats After Trump Barred From Ballots ›
- Trump Appeals Removal From Maine Primary Ballot ›
- Illinois, Massachusetts Voters Join Fight to Bar Trump From Ballots ›
- Maine Judge Defers on Trump Ballot Decision Until Supreme Court Ruling ›
- After Fleeing on Jan. 6, GOP Lawmakers Urge Supreme Court to Keep Trump on Ballot ›
- 'I Remember Hitler,' Says 91-Year-Old Republican Behind Trump Eligibility Case ›
- Opinion | Insurrectionist Trump vs. the 14th Amendment | Common Dreams ›
- Judge Disqualifies Trump From Illinois Ballot, Citing Jan 6 Role ›
- After Immunity Ruling, Trump Indicted Again for Trying to Reverse 2020 Election | Common Dreams ›
- Trump Pardons for Jan. 6 Insurrectionists Would Be 'Affront to Our Democracy' | Common Dreams ›
A pair of conservative legal scholars argue in a newly released paper that, under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, former President Donald Trump is disqualified to hold office again, echoing a case long made by progressive experts and watchdogs.
In an in-depth analysis of Section 3, William Baude of the University of Chicago and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St. Thomas contend that the clause "remains of direct and dramatic relevance today" even though it arose from "a particular historical situation and acute problem arising in the aftermath of the Civil War"—namely, the decision by Southern states to send supporters of secession and rebellion to Congress.
"Fast-forward a century and a half. The events surrounding efforts to overturn the result of the presidential election of 2020 have sparked renewed scholarly, judicial, and political interest in Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment," noted Baude and Paulsen, both active members of the right-wing Federalist Society. "Several of the people involved in these events—most notably the defeated president, Donald Trump—had previously taken oaths to support the Constitution."
"If they engaged in or gave aid and comfort to an insurrection against the constitutional government," they added, "Section 3 would appear to bar them from holding office again."
Trump, the frontrunner in the 2024 Republican presidential primary, is currently facing a number of felony charges stemming from his role in attempting to overturn the 2020 presidential election and inciting the January 6, 2021 insurrection, including conspiracy to defraud the United States and "conspiracy against the right to vote and to have one's vote counted."
Special Counsel Jack Smith, who laid out the charges last week in a 45-page indictment, has proposed a January 2, 2024 trial date.
But legal experts and historians have argued that Trump is disqualified for office under Section 3 whether or not he is convicted.
The clause states that "no person shall be a senator or representative in Congress, or elector of president and vice president, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, 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, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof."
Only a two-thirds vote by both chambers of Congress can lift the disqualification.
"Trump is disqualified from holding any public office, including the office of the president, under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment."
In their new paper, Baude and Paulsen wrote that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment—known as the insurrection clause—is "self-executing, operating as an immediate disqualification from office, without the need for additional action by Congress."
"It can and should be enforced by every official, state or federal, who judges qualifications," Baude and Paulsen argued, rejecting the notion that the First Amendment shields those who have engaged in or incited insurrection from disqualification under Section 3.
The clause, the pair added, "covers a broad range of former offices, including the presidency. And in particular, it disqualifies former President Donald Trump, and potentially many others, because of their participation in the attempted overthrow of the 2020 presidential election."
John Bonifaz, co-founder and president of Free Speech for People, called the new paper a "must-read for every secretary of state" and "chief election official in the country."
"As this article makes clear, they must follow the mandate of 14.3 [and] bar Trump from the ballot," Bonifaz wrote. "If they do not, we will sue."
Free Speech for People is one of several advocacy groups preparing to take legal action if Trump is not disqualified.
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington argued in a report that "overwhelming evidence establishes that President Trump was the central cause of and a participant in the insurrection. Because of that, Trump is disqualified from holding any public office, including the office of the president, under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment."
Last September, a New Mexico judge ordered the removal of a county commissioner who took part in the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. The decision marked the first time since 1869 that a court disqualified a public official under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
In an
interview with
The New York Times on Thursday, Paulsen suggested the new paper could bolster "a lawsuit presenting a vital constitutional issue that potentially the Supreme Court would want to hear and decide."
Baude, the paper's other co-author, summarized the pair's conclusion to the Times: "Donald Trump cannot be president—cannot run for president, cannot become president, cannot hold office—unless two-thirds of Congress decides to grant him amnesty for his conduct on January 6."
- 'Disqualify Trump' Ad Calls Out GOP Enablers as He Skips First 2024 Debate ›
- 'Trump Is Ineligible': Top Election Officials Urged to Bar Former President From Ballot ›
- Opinion | The Right-Wing Judge Who Could Tank the Most Slam-Dunk Case Against Trump | Common Dreams ›
- Watchdog Sues to Keep Trump Off Ballot in Colorado, Citing 14th Amendment ›
- Minnesota Voters File 14th Amendment Suit to Keep Trump Off Ballot ›
- Citing 14th Amendment, Michigan Voters File Suit to Bar Trump From 2024 Ballot ›
- Minnesotans Vow to Still 'Stand Up for Our Democracy' After Court Keeps Trump on Ballot ›
- Group Vows to 'Immediately' Appeal After Michigan Judge Lets Trump Stay on Ballot ›
- Colorado Judge Says Trump 'Incited' Jan 6 Attack—But Keeps Him on Ballot ›
- Colorado Supreme Court Disqualifies 'Insurrectionist' Trump from 2024 Ballot ›
- Opinion | Trump Led an Insurrection and a Court Is Right to Bar Him Under the 14th Amendment | Common Dreams ›
- 'He Is Not Qualified': Maine Bars Trump From Primary Ballot ›
- Maine, Colorado Officials Face Threats After Trump Barred From Ballots ›
- Trump Appeals Removal From Maine Primary Ballot ›
- Illinois, Massachusetts Voters Join Fight to Bar Trump From Ballots ›
- Maine Judge Defers on Trump Ballot Decision Until Supreme Court Ruling ›
- After Fleeing on Jan. 6, GOP Lawmakers Urge Supreme Court to Keep Trump on Ballot ›
- 'I Remember Hitler,' Says 91-Year-Old Republican Behind Trump Eligibility Case ›
- Opinion | Insurrectionist Trump vs. the 14th Amendment | Common Dreams ›
- Judge Disqualifies Trump From Illinois Ballot, Citing Jan 6 Role ›
- After Immunity Ruling, Trump Indicted Again for Trying to Reverse 2020 Election | Common Dreams ›
- Trump Pardons for Jan. 6 Insurrectionists Would Be 'Affront to Our Democracy' | Common Dreams ›

