{"id":36186,"date":"2024-01-18T02:02:00","date_gmt":"2024-01-18T02:02:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/?p=36186"},"modified":"2024-01-29T18:25:09","modified_gmt":"2024-01-29T18:25:09","slug":"trump-defends-himself-to-the-supreme-court-saying-he-called-for-peace-patriotism-respect-for-law-and-order-on-jan-6-and-is-not-an-insurrectionist","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/trump-defends-himself-to-the-supreme-court-saying-he-called-for-peace-patriotism-respect-for-law-and-order-on-jan-6-and-is-not-an-insurrectionist\/","title":{"rendered":"Trump defends himself to the Supreme Court, saying he called \u2018for peace, patriotism, respect for law and order\u2019 on Jan. 6 and is not an\u00a0insurrectionist"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Wayne Unger<\/a>, Quinnipiac University<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Filing late in the day to meet the Jan. 18, 2024, deadline, former President Donald Trump submitted a brief to the U.S. Supreme Court<\/a> that asked the justices to overturn the Colorado Supreme Court\u2019s decision<\/a> to remove him from that state\u2019s primary ballot.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Norma Anderson, a Republican and former Colorado state lawmaker, and several other plaintiffs had filed suit in September 2023<\/a> to keep Trump off the 2024 Colorado ballots. The plaintiffs argued that Trump was disqualified from public office because his \u201cefforts to overturn the 2020 election and interfere with the peaceful transfer of power were part of an insurrection against the Constitution of the United States.\u201d Their arguments were based on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment<\/a> of the Constitution, which bans insurrectionists from holding public office.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Colorado Supreme Court issued its ruling<\/a> in the case, originally known as Anderson v. Griswold, on Dec. 19. The Colorado justices concluded that Trump was disqualified from holding the office of the president because of his actions on Jan. 6, 2021, and they affirmed the trial court\u2019s conclusion that Trump engaged in an insurrection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThese actions constituted overt, voluntary, and direct participation in the insurrection,\u201d the court majority wrote<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Trump faces more than a dozen similar legal challenges to his candidacy in other states as well<\/a>, based on Section 3. Many complainants, jurists and constitutional law scholars argue that Trump is disqualified to hold office because he \u201cengaged in insurrection or rebellion\u201d against the U.S. based on his actions before, during and after the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Trump appealed the Colorado Supreme Court\u2019s decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, and the justices agreed to consider the case. In his Jan. 18 brief, Trump presented a range of arguments for why the Colorado decision was wrong. Chief among them: He claimed that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment does not apply to the presidency and that he did not engage in an insurrection against the United States.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Describing his actions on Jan. 6, 2021, Trump\u2019s brief says \u201cCalling for peace, patriotism, respect for law and order, and directing the Secretary of Defense to do what needs to be done to protect the American people is in no way inciting or participating in an \u2018insurrection.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"A<\/a>
President Donald Trump speaks at the \u2018Stop The Steal\u2019 Rally on Jan. 6, 2021, in Washington. Tasos Katopodis\/Getty Images<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Officers and insurrections<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Trump\u2019s brief attacks the Colorado Supreme Court\u2019s \u201cdubious interpretation of (S)ection 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment.\u201d He argues that Section 3 does not apply to the presidency because the \u201cPresident is not an \u2018officer of the United States.\u2019\u201d Trump points to other parts of the Constitution<\/a> that use the term \u201cOfficer,\u201d and he argues that an \u201cOfficer of the United States\u201d only includes political appointees, such as the Secretary of State, and not anyone who is elected to an office.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is merit to this argument, but Trump confuses the original intent of the Framers, when the Constitution was initially ratified, with the intent of the 39th Congress that drafted the 14th Amendment<\/a> decades after the nation\u2019s founding. Several constitutional law scholars argue that the 39th Congress did intend for Section 3 to apply to the presidency<\/a> because congressional records highlight senators\u2019 and representatives\u2019 specific comments that it should.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Whether Section 3 applies to the presidency is likely the first question that the Supreme Court will have to answer. While Trump also claims that he did not engage in an insurrection, the justices likely will not consider whether he did or not because the court generally does not disturb the factual conclusions of trial courts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But the justices may have to consider the other legal questions that Trump raises. Trump argues that even if Section 3 applies to the presidency, it cannot be enforced because Congress has not passed a law to enforce it. But as a constitutional law scholar<\/a>, I believe that perhaps his strongest argument and the justices\u2019 easiest legal question to answer turns to the plain text of Section 3, which states that it bars insurrectionists and rebels from holding office. It does not say anything about running for office.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bullets, not ballots<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868<\/a>, is considered a \u201cReconstruction Amendment<\/a>,\u201d along with the 13th and 15th amendments. Congress and state legislatures ratified the Reconstruction Amendments in the years immediately following the end of the Civil War. Within that context, the drafters of the Reconstruction Amendments sought, among many things, to prevent Confederates from serving in public office following their unsuccessful rebellion<\/a> against the Union.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Section 3 of the 14th Amendment says:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cNo 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 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. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

With 15 commas, the meaning and application of Section 3 may confuse many readers. Constitutional law scholar Mark Graber provided a thorough discussion of each sentence fragment and clause in a recent article for The Conversation<\/a>. In his summary of this section of the 14th Amendment, he says \u201cThese words in the amendment declare that those who turn to bullets when ballots fail to provide their desired result cannot be trusted as democratic officials.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"A<\/a>
A page from the appeal by former President Donald Trump asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review the Colorado Supreme Court\u2019s decision. AP Photo\/Jon Elswick<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Settling the unsettled<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The Supreme Court agreed to consider Trump\u2019s appeal in early January 2024 because whether Trump is constitutionally qualified to serve as the president of the United States again is a critical question in an area of law that is not settled. While the Supreme Court considered some general cases of insurrection and rebellion<\/a> following the Civil War, the Supreme Court has never faced this specific question regarding Section 3.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Supreme Court will consider whether the Colorado Supreme Court erred in ordering the former president excluded from the 2024 presidential primary ballot.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But this specific question also presents a number of related legal questions that the Supreme Court could also decide, ranging from whether Section 3 applies to the presidency to whether Section 3 only prohibits a candidate from serving in office as opposed to appearing on any ballot. Then, of course, there is the factual issue as to whether the former president \u201cengaged in an insurrection or rebellion\u201d against the United States.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Trump v. Anderson on Feb. 8, 2024<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wayne Unger<\/a>, Assistant Professor of Law, Quinnipiac University<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This article is republished from The Conversation<\/a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Wayne Unger, Quinnipiac University Filing late in the day to meet the Jan. 18, 2024, deadline, former President Donald Trump submitted a brief to the U.S. Supreme Court that asked the justices to overturn the Colorado Supreme Court\u2019s decision to remove him from that state\u2019s primary ballot. Norma Anderson, a Republican and former Colorado state […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":44,"featured_media":36187,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[4],"tags":[11748,8323,1907,5715,479,9276,13242,6663,992,686,1666],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/36186"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/44"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=36186"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/36186\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":36290,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/36186\/revisions\/36290"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/36187"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=36186"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=36186"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=36186"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}