A legal attempt to prevent Donald Trump from running for president in 2024 is being looked at in court.
The plan is to stop Mr. Trump from being on the primary ballot by using a part of the US Constitution called Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. This part says that people who have fought against the country can’t hold a government job.
At first, the idea was supported by liberal activists. But now, some conservatives are also starting to like it.
However, some people say that if it happens, it might take away the chance for voters to decide if the former president should come back to the White House.
A judge in Colorado will decide on a case in the next few weeks. In Minnesota, a court said no to removing Mr. Trump from the primary ballot. But the court said people can try again to remove him from the general election ballot.
In Michigan, a judge said Trump can still be on the ballot for the Republican primary because it’s a political issue for Congress to decide, not the state.
A legal case has been started in New Hampshire.
The new legal strategy is a last attempt to stop a popular ex-president from running for office.
The final decision could be made by the conservative Supreme Court that he helped create – if it even reaches that point.
What does theory mean.
The 14th Amendment became a law after the American Civil War. Section 3 of the amendment stopped people who tried to leave the country from getting their old government jobs back when southern states joined the Union again.
It was used against Confederate president Jefferson Davis and his vice-president Alexander Stephens. They both used to work in Congress. But it has not been used much since then.
It became a big issue in politics again when Mr. Trump tried to change the result of the 2020 election. This led to a riot at the US Capitol in January 2021.
After the attack, the US House of Representatives accused the former president of encouraging a rebellion and voted to impeach him.
If the US Senate had voted to find him guilty, they could have then voted to stop him from ever being able to hold office again with just a simple majority vote.
But that didn’t happen: the Senate couldn’t agree by enough votes to convict Mr. Trump, so there was no second vote.
Is Section 3 for Trump.
Free Speech For People, a group that supports certain ideas, is saying that it does.
The group complained about lawmakers who supported Trump and accused them of causing conflict.
Ron Fein, the legal director of the organization, argues that the 14th Amendment was not only written for the time after the Civil War, but for future rebellions as well.
He told the BBC that the riot at the US Capitol was the first time in our country’s history that the peaceful transfer of power was delayed, and it was worse than what the Confederates ever achieved.
Mr Fein said that the people we opposed in 2022 were involved in the events that led to the insurrection.
He said their cases set important legal examples that can be used to prove “Trump is the main leader of the rebellion”.
How will it progress.
Free Speech For People wants to try to stop Mr. Trump from running for president in many states. It is also asking the top election officials in at least nine states to take him off the primary ballot.
Either way, the candidate will likely protest the decision, which could lead to a court case in the US Supreme Court to decide his fate.
The legal plan has gained momentum since August, when Mr. Trump was accused of trying to change the election results in two different criminal cases.
In that month, two conservative legal scholars wrote in a paper that Section 3 automatically disqualifies someone from office without Congress having to do anything else.
Mr Trump may not be allowed to run for election if state or federal officials decide he doesn’t meet the requirements. That’s what the two people concluded.
Mr Baude and Mr. Paulsen are part of a powerful conservative group called the Federalist Society.
They think the Constitution should be understood how the people who wrote it meant it to be, and other legal experts who have similar beliefs support them.
Even the highest court in the country, which has a mostly conservative group of judges and three judges appointed by Trump, might agree with their point, according to Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, a dean at Yale who agrees with Baude-Paulsen’s viewpoint.
“He said that as long as one of the election officials from the 50 states finds him not allowed to participate, that’s all that’s needed. ”
“One side will send it to a state court for review, and then both sides can appeal the decision and send it to the US Supreme Court for a quick resolution. ”
He said the case will be decided soon when Republican voters vote next year.
What is the reason people don’t like it.
Critics have raised concerns about whether the theory is practical, and if it should be used in a very divided America.
In a article for Bloomberg, professor Noah Feldman said that he believes Donald Trump is not the right person to be president. However, it’s the voters’ decision to stop him. The words from the past that seemed magical won’t be able to help us now.
To create a convoluted and complex legal argument.