Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft said that while he didn’t want to do it, he had to remind people of how “severe” the situation is.
A top Republican official in Missouri is threatening to remove President Joe Biden from appearing on the ballot as retaliation for the determination in two other states that Donald Trump doesn’t qualify because he “engaged in insurrection.”
“What has happened in Colorado & Maine is disgraceful & undermines our republic,” Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft wrote on the social media site X on Friday. “While I expect the Supreme Court to overturn this, if not, Secretaries of State will step in & ensure the new legal standard for @realDonaldTrump applies equally to @JoeBiden!”
Ashcroft’s post came shortly after the Supreme Court agreed to review a decision by Colorado’s high court that found Trump could be barred from the state’s primary ballot because of his actions leading up to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.
Why should he be treated any differently than anyone else that was disqualified under the 14th amendment?
The big distinction here would be that everyone else disqualified under Section 3 was a public officer in a major political organization (the CSA) who was in open war with the US. No question of fact whatsoever.
While Trump was too much of a wuss to openly lead his insurrection himself, so some government entity should probably be responsible for determining whether or not section 3 applies, and what standard they have to meet to do so. There are probably good arguments why qualification for a federal office isn’t properly decided by a state judge or official.
That is not a distinction actually made by section 3. Oath breakers are disqualified, not rebels per se.
State elections officials already do that for things like age, residency requirements, etc. It’s part of federalism that the state governments administer federal elections.
I am not saying he should all candidates suck honestly don’t want any of them but. Nothing you can do unfortunately I am just stating an opinion you should have to be convicted of an actual crime like treason which I think they could charge him with and then remove him based on that charge.
Requiring a conviction in the first place is the special treatment I’m referring to.
Disqualification is not a criminal penalty. If it were then it could be removed by a presidential pardon.
Instead it can only be removed by Congress–a body that is specifically prohibited from passing laws that set or alter someone’s criminal liability.
I agree then let’s congress decide and not the court my only point is now the create where we are now the could remove Biden and say it’s because of hunter biden and the would not be wrong that’s my only point.
congress can decide by a 2/3 majority that his insurrection doesn’t bar him from running. it’s in the constitution. failure to pass that resolution is congress deciding that his insurrection counts and he’s disqualified.
Congress can only remove the disqualification, they can’t impose it.
It’s a problem that the amendment doesn’t tell us how it’s supposed to work, but the fact that other disqualifying factors (age, residency, etc.) are determined by the states suggests that the states can determine disqualification on the insurrection factor too, and through the same procedural mechanisms.
This makes much more sense thanks for the clarification. 🖖