Activists want to disqualify Trump from ballot in key states under 14th Amendment - eviltoast

Two civil rights organizations are launching a campaign to pressure state governments to disqualify former President Trump from appearing on ballots in 2024.

The groups say secretaries of state are empowered by the 14th amendment to bar Trump from running for office because of the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol insurrection.

Starting Sunday, Mi Familia Vota and Free Speech for People will stage a week of rallies and banner drops outside the offices of the secretaries of state of California, Oregon, Colorado and Georgia.

  • Leeks@kbin.social
    272·
    1 year ago

    It pains me to say this, but in an effort to break up the group think, remember, he hasn’t been convicted of anything yet. If we really believe in due process and innocent till proven guilty, until he is tried and convicted, these petitions have no merit.

    All that being said, justice delayed is justice denied, so we should be looking for court reforms to make this whole process move faster, while still being a fair as humanly possible.

    • YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.worldOP
      71·
      1 year ago

      You’re 100% correct. One of the goals of this community is for members to see all sides of politics, not agree with them, but to be exposed to it for better understanding. Now there is a lot of evidence against Trump in this matter and it’s tough to temper your personal bias towards him. That said he hasn’t been convicted yet.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      5·
      1 year ago

      The article says it may not disqualify him regardless, but I don’t think from the text that he needs to be found guilty in a court of law of engaging in insurrection. This may sound like quibbling, but it’s always quibbling when it comes to the Constitution.

      That clause bars from a series of public offices people 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.”

      • Leeks@kbin.social
        3·
        1 year ago

        Again, just looking at the legal side of things, trying to remove all personal bias:

        The question becomes “was Jan 6th an ‘insurrection’, a ‘rebellion’ or a ‘riot’?” While judges have described it as an insurrection from the bench, there have been no charges of insurrection brought against anybody involved so far. The charges include destruction of property, assault, and interfering with an official proceeding, but no charges of insurrection.

        Until someone is charged with insurrection or rebellion, legally speaking, it was maybe a “riot”, which, strictly reading the constitution, is not disqualifying for public office.