Dems Consider Obscure Provision in Constitution to Prevent Trump From Oval Office


OPINION: This article contains commentary which reflects the author's opinion

Democrats continue to be obsessed with keeping former President Donald Trump from once again becoming President Donald Trump, as evidenced by what many have described as “unhinged” rants against him to commemorate the Jan. 6 Capitol Building riot.

But some are going a step further, indicating that what they really fear is another effective term from a president who is brusque at times but who nevertheless was successful by any reasonable measure — so much so that they want to make sure he never sets foot inside the Oval Office again.

As reported by the New York Post, a handful of Dems are looking into whether they can bar Trump from ever again holding an elected office using an obscure provision of the 14th Amendment.


The outlet adds:

Section 3 of the amendment, enacted in 1868 and best known for enshrining the Equal Protection Clause, prevents any government official who “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against the US from holding office again.

According to The Hill, approximately a dozen Democratic lawmakers have publicly or privately spoken about applying Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to Trump, whom they accuse of inciting the Jan. 6 riot that disrupted the congressional certification of the 2020 election results.

“If anything the idea has waxed and waned,” liberal Harvard Law School professor emeritus Laurence Tribe told the news outlet.


“I hear it being raised with considerable frequency these days both by media commentators and by members of Congress and their staffs, some of whom have sought my advice on how to implement Section 3,” he added.

Tribe went on to say he has met with staffers from some of Congress’ most outlandish leftists including Reps. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), a member of the House select committee investigating the riot, Jerry Nadler (D-NY), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, and Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.).

“I continue to explore all legal paths to ensure that the people who tried to subvert our democracy are not in charge of it,” Wasserman Schultz said to The Hill.

There is no evidence, to date, that Trump tried to “subvert our democracy.” And thus far, the Jan. 6 Committee that was empaneled by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has not found a shred of evidence that Trump did anything unlawful, by the admission of the committee’s chairman, Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.).


In an interview with CNN’s Dana Bash last week, Thompson was asked if Trump’s alleged “lack of action on Jan. 6 may actually warrant a criminal referral.”

“The only thing I can say is highly unusual for any in charge of anything to watch what’s going on and do nothing,” Thompson responded.

“Is it criminal,” Bash broke in.

Thompson replied: “We don’t know. We [are] in the process of trying to get all the information.”


He noted further: “But I can say if there’s anything that we come upon as a committee that we think would warrant a referral to the Department of Justice, we’ll do that. That’s our oath as members of Congress. So it’s not just that. It’s any of the other things we’re looking at, if there’s any confidence on the part of our committee that something criminal we believe has occurred, we’ll make the referral.”

The Post added:

It’s unclear what mechanism would be used to apply Section 3 to Trump. Some experts say the House and Senate could vote by a simple majority to find the 45th president engaged in insurrection against the government. Others, including Tribe, say the determination would need to be made by a federal court or a neutral fact-finding body.

Nevertheless, some left-wing organizations don’t want to leave it in Congress’ hands, the outlet added.


One of them, the misnamed group Free Speech For People, is urging state election officials to apply the amendment if the 45th president decides to run again, so as to prevent his name from showing up on ballots.

“Just as states are permitted (if not required) to exclude from the presidential ballot a candidate who is not a natural-born citizen, who is underage, or who has previously been elected twice as president, so too states should exclude from the ballot a candidate, such as Mr. Trump, who previously swore to support the Constitution, but then engaged in insurrection,” the group wrote in a letter sent to chief election officials in all 50 states last summer.

Trump has not been charged with “insurrection,” nor have any of the Jan. 6 rioters.

Back to top button