Trump has already disqualified himself from White House return – say two conservative law professors

The two law professors argue the former president should be barred under the 14th Amendment

Donald Trump should be disqualified from serving as president under Section Three of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, according to a new paper published by two conservative law professors.

William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulsen argue for their interpretation that the 14th Amendment contains a clause that any former elected official who engages in insurrection or rebellion is prohibited from holding office in the future.

Participating in an insurrection is exactly what Mr Trump stands accused of doing, both by the US Department of Justice and by various members of Congress.

Mr Trump was impeached in the House of Representatives for his role in facilitating an attempt to overturn the result of the 2020 presidential election that peaked when a group of his supporters stormed the US Capitol building on January 6, 2021.

Academics have described Mr Trump’s attempt to stay in power after losing the 2020 election to Joe Biden as an attempted self-coup — an attempt by a serving executive to interfere with one or more branches of government in an attempt to hold onto or expand their power.

Mr Trump’s alleged attempt to reverse the result of the election was ultimately unsuccessful. But now, just more than two-and-half years later, the one-term president is running for the White House again and leading the race for the Republican nomination.

Despite his alleged assault on American democracy, and despite the fact that he’s currently facing charges in three separate criminal cases, it is not at all outside the realm of possibility that Mr Trump may win next year’s election in a rematch with Mr Biden.

Pro-Trump supporters storm the U.S. Capitol following a rally with President Donald Trump on January 6, 2021 in Washington, DC. (Getty Images)

According to Mr Baude and Mr Paulson, however, Mr Trump shouldn’t be allowed to return to office.

Mr Baude, who teaches law at the University of Chicago, and Mr Paulson, who teaches at St Thomas University in St Paul, Minnesota, argue that Section Three is “self-executing” and “can and should be enforced by every official, state or federal, who judges qualifications.”

The Fourteenth Amendment was passed in 1868 in the aftermath of the US Civil War and is most notable for making any person born in the United States a citizen.

Section Three of the Amendment was a direct response to Confederate secession from the United States and has hardly ever been enforced — not least because of an 1872 act that granted amnesty to a number of former Confederates.

It is not specified in the Amendment exactly how Section Three might be enforced, whether Congress would have to act or whether a citizen or organisation would have to sue to have Mr Trump removed from presidential ballots to bring the issue before a court.

There is, however, a recent precedent for a judge acting to bar someone who was involved in an insurrection attempt from holding office: former Otero County, New Mexico Commissioner Couy Griffin was banned for life from public office for leading the Cowboys for Trump group during the Capitol riot.

The Supreme Court has not weighed in on the enforcement of Section Three but were Mr Trump’s political fortunes imperilled by it, that could potentially change.