Will Congress vote on Trump or Biden’s presidency
Supreme Court to Decide on Trump and Biden’s Eligibility for Office
The Supreme Court is set to hear a case on Thursday that will determine whether former President Donald Trump can be barred from running for president again under the 14th Amendment. This case could also have implications for President Joe Biden’s eligibility for office.
According to Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, individuals who have taken an oath to uphold the Constitution and have engaged in “insurrection or rebellion” against the United States are prohibited from holding state or federal office, unless Congress votes to remove this disability.
The Supreme Court will consider several key issues in this case, including whether Section 3 applies only to the Civil War, whether the January 6th riot at the U.S. Capitol qualifies as an “insurrection,” whether the presidency is included in the offices covered by the amendment, whether Trump engaged in an insurrection, and whether Section 3 is self-executing or requires federal legislation for enforcement.
In addition, a brief filed by the National Republican Senatorial Committee introduces another aspect of the case. It argues that Section 3 does not prevent individuals from running for office, but only from holding office under certain conditions.
If Section 3’s disability were a permanent bar, a disabled candidate would not be able to run for an office they cannot hold. However, Congress has the power to remove this disability by a two-thirds vote in each chamber. Therefore, a disabled candidate can still run for office, as Congress ultimately decides whether they can hold the position.
This provision of Section 3 raises several concerns. There is no requirement for Congress to take a vote or to do so within a specific timeframe. Congress could vote after Election Day or even after the elected official has taken office.
The brief also highlights the Twentieth Amendment, which addresses the possibility of a President-elect being disqualified on Inauguration Day. It states that if the President-elect fails to qualify, the Vice President-elect will act as President until a qualified President is determined by Congress.
It’s not just Trump who faces questions about eligibility. President Biden’s campaign is also under scrutiny. There are arguments that he, while serving as president, vice president, or senator, engaged in insurrection or “gave aid or comfort to the enemies” of the Constitution. Allegations include allowing a Chinese spy satellite to traverse the U.S., conspiring with China and cartels, and engaging in criminal activities related to illegal migration.
Congress retains the power to vote on removing the supposed disability of both Trump and Biden, even after the election and inauguration.
Additional Complexities
It’s important to note that Congress does not vote on the existence of a disability, but on whether it should be removed assuming it exists. This raises a dilemma for members of Congress who may not believe there is a disability. Their vote, regardless of whether they support or oppose removing the disability, implies its existence.
Furthermore, it is unclear which Congress has the authority to vote on removing the disability and if their decision is final. Could a lame-duck Congress vote to remove the disability, only for the new Congress to reverse that decision? Can a Congress vote against removing the disability for one office but remove it for another?
Lastly, the question arises whether a congressional vote on removing a Section 3 disability can be reviewed by the judiciary.
These complexities call for a reconsideration or amendment of Section 3, or the enactment of legislation to clarify its implementation.
What role should the courts play in the interpretation and enforcement of Section 3, according to the brief
Ighlights the potential abuse of power by Congress in determining who can hold office. It argues that the determination of eligibility should be left to the voters and not to Congress, as it could be used as a means to suppress political opponents.
Furthermore, the brief proposes that the interpretation and enforcement of Section 3 should be left to the courts rather than Congress. It asserts that the courts are better equipped to make impartial and objective decisions based on the Constitution and legal precedent.
The Supreme Court’s decision on this case will have significant implications for both Donald Trump and Joe Biden. If the Court determines that Trump engaged in an insurrection, it could bar him from running for president in the future. Similarly, if it concludes that Biden’s actions on January 6th constituted an insurrection, it could potentially affect his eligibility for the presidency.
In addition to the political implications, this case will also shape the interpretation and application of the 14th Amendment in future cases. The Court’s decision will establish important precedents regarding the scope and limitations of Section 3 and its implications for individuals seeking public office.
Overall, the upcoming Supreme Court case on Trump and Biden’s eligibility for office is set to address crucial questions regarding the application of the 14th Amendment. The Court’s decision will not only have immediate consequences for the two former and current presidents but will also shape the future interpretation and enforcement of the amendment.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...