Legal experts raise doubts: Could Trump's 2024 run be halted by insurrection claim?

Former President Donald Trump's potential bid for the 2024 presidency faces a new hurdle as legal scholars William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulsen argue his eligibility could be limited by the Constitution. Baude and Paulsen, from the University of Chicago and the University of St. Thomas respectively, contend that Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election could classify as "insurrection," rendering him ineligible under the 14th Amendment unless granted approval by a two-thirds majority in both the Senate and House of Representatives.

Insurrection claim challenges Trump's candidacy

In their extensive 126-page report, Baude and Paulsen assert that the 14th Amendment "disqualified former President Donald Trump, and potentially many others, because of their participation in the attempted overthrow of the 2020 presidential election." This Amendment, ratified shortly after the Civil War, prohibits individuals who have previously sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution from holding office if they engage in "insurrection or rebellion."

Trump's controversial stance and legal battles

Former President Trump, who claims the 2020 election was rigged against him, remains a prominent figure in American politics despite numerous legal dismissals of his allegations. While he currently leads the polls for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, his potential candidacy might be subject to judicial scrutiny.

The path forward: Legal battle looms

Baude and Paulsen contend that Trump's eligibility might become a matter for the courts, stating that if state officials exclude him from the ballot, he could challenge their decision in court. Alternatively, voters could potentially challenge his eligibility in some states. Given the weight of the issue, they suggest that the case could swiftly reach the U.S. Supreme Court.

Also Read | 'It was just a bribe,’ Donald Trump accuses Joe Biden of accepting $20M bribe, demands impeachment

Unprecedented implications of the 14th Amendment

The scholars assert that Section Three of the 14th Amendment carries significant legal implications often overlooked. They argue that it is "self-executing," meaning that officials at both the state and federal levels have the authority to enforce its provisions independently.

Conservative scholars weigh in

Both Baude and Paulsen are members of the conservative-leaning Federalist Society, known for advocating individual liberty, traditional values, and adherence to the rule of law within the legal system. As Trump's potential campaign gains momentum, the constitutional debate surrounding his eligibility promises to add a new layer of complexity to an already intense political landscape.

Disclaimer: The copyright of this article belongs to the original author. Reposting this article is solely for the purpose of information dissemination and does not constitute any investment advice. If there is any infringement, please contact us immediately. We will make corrections or deletions as necessary. Thank you.