Turley offers a weak attempt at rebutting that New York Times
article promoting the case that Trump should be disqualified under the 14th Amendment...
Despite my respect for these academics, I simply fail to see how the text, history or purpose of the 14th Amendment even remotely favors this view. Despite the extensive research of Baude and Paulsen, their analysis ends where it began: Was January 6 an insurrection or rebellion?
The 14th Amendment bars those who took the oath and then “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same.” It then adds that that disqualification can extend to those who have “given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.” According to these experts, Jan. 6 was an “insurrection” and Trump gave “aid and comfort” to those who engaged in it by spreading election fraud claims and not immediately denouncing the violence.
But even the view that it was an “insurrection” is by no means a consensus. Polls have shown that most of the public view Jan. 6 for what it was: a protest that became a riot. One year after the riot, CBS News mostly downplayed and ignored the result of its own poll showing that 76 percent viewed it for what it was, as a “protest gone too far.” The view that it was an actual “insurrection” was far less settled, with almost half rejecting the claim, a division breaking along partisan lines.
This is nothing new from Turley, he’s got a narrative of his own and he’s gonna push it. What Turley and the New York Times both neglect to mention is the case of a county commissioner from New Mexico who was removed from office on these very grounds. The New Mexico Supreme Court upheld the decision to disqualify Couy Griffin and denied his appeal.
The order removing Griffin from office conclusively found that the January 6th attack on our nation’s Capitol was an insurrection and that Griffin’s participation disqualified him from office.
Now, I’m not a well known commentator and prominent law professor like Mr. Turley, but I’m willing to bet that legal precedent set in a court of law and upheld by the New Mexico Supreme Court carries more weight than a few public opinion polls.
Again, IANAL… Nor am I a legal scholar… But, if this is the best argument conservative legal minds can come up with, then #FPOTUS is toast for sure.
From user Paradigm Change in the comments...
I am a constitutional lawyer (specialty executive powers) but with the caveat, not a criminal one. I saw an assertion that my old constitutional law teacher, Prof. Tribe said Congress needed to act. Do you have a source? Note: Tribe could have said Trump’s actions fall under the disqualifications clause, but still further action by Congress is needed (agreeing with Justice Chase’s decision). I disagree if that is the case. Frankly, while Tribe is rarely wrong, I frequently find his arguments lacking, say as compared to Jamie Raskin. In any event, it seems to me that had Congress gone to the trouble to pass the 14th Amendment but not bothered to pass enabling legislation they thought was needed would make no sense. Consequently, I reject Justice Chase’s reasoning. However, I also reject the notion that Section 3 is self-enforcing. There must be some legal basis for enforcing the disqualification clause. My initial conclusion pending further research is that legal basis has been satisfied by the convictions of the January 6 Capitol participants.
UPDATE: PvtJarHead ·
Some up to date polling since that’s what matters most to Mr. Turley...
The New York Times
In the Quinnipiac poll, 54 percent of registered voters said Mr. Trump should be prosecuted for trying to overturn the 2020 election. And seven out of 10 voters said that anyone convicted of a felony should no longer be eligible to be president.
Half of Americans, but only 20 percent of Republicans, said that Mr. Trump should suspend his presidential campaign, according to the ABC News/Ipsos poll. This poll, which surveyed American adults, was the only one of the four surveys conducted entirely after Mr. Trump’s indictment in Georgia.
When specifically asked by ABC about the Georgia case, 63 percent said the latest criminal charges against Mr. Trump were “serious.”
Fewer than one in five Republicans said that Mr. Trump had committed a crime in Georgia or that he broke any laws in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.