Trump’s lawyers argued in a Colorado Court that he had no duty when acting as President to “support” the Constitution because the word “support” is not mentioned in the Presidential Oath.
CREW Seeks to Disqualify Trump Under the 14th Amendment
Image Credit: Shutterstock.
This claim originated in the Colorado case where Trump faces a lawsuit from a group known as CREW, contending that Trump is ineligible for the presidential election due to his alleged violation of the 14th Amendment by providing “aid and comfort” to the insurrection.
Trump’s Legal Team Seeks to Dismiss the Lawsuit
Image Credit: Shutterstock.
Trump’s legal team seeks to dismiss the lawsuit to have him disqualified from the ballot under the 14th Amendment, stating that Trump had no duty to “support” the Constitution and that Section Three of the 14th Amendment does not apply to the Office of the President.
The Insurrection Clause
Image Credit: Shutterstock.
The Insurrection Clause of the Amendment prohibits those who have “engaged in insurrection” against the United States from holding a civil, military, or elected office unless a two-thirds majority of the House and Senate approve.”
Trump Wasn’t an Executive Charged With a Duty to Support the Constitution, Lawyers Argue
Image Credit; Shutterstock.
Trump’s lawyers argued that he wasn’t an executive charged with the duty to “support” the Constitution and is, therefore, immune to the insurrection clause.
Lawyers Filing States President to “Preserve, Protect and Defend” Not to “Support” Constitution
Image Credit: Shutterstock.
The filing from Trump’s legal team states: “The Presidential oath, which the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment surely knew, requires the President to swear to ‘preserve, protect and defend’ the Constitution — not to ‘support’ the Constitution.
Framers Never Intended Section Three to Apply to the President
Image Credit: Shutterstock.
“Because the framers chose to define the group of people subject to Section Three by an oath to ‘support’ the Constitution of the United States, and not by an oath to ‘preserve, protect and defend’ the Constitution, the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment never intended for it to apply to the President,” argued Trump’s lawyers in their filing.
The Presidential Oath
Image Credit: amadeustx / Shutterstock.
The Constitution sets out The Presidential Oath, written long before the 14th Amendment.
The Presidential Oath reads:
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
Section Three of the 14th Amendment “Support the Constitution”
Image Credit: Shutterstock.
Section Three states, “No person [shall] hold any office, civil or military, under the United States… 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…”
The Absurdity Doctrine
Image Credit: Shutterstock.
In response to the recent arguments made by Trump’s lawyers, Jason Miciak of the Washington Press recently wrote:
“Again, in contract law and administrative law, we do pay attention to the exact words used and often will only act on the exact words…”
“There is one exception firmly embedded in case law. It is literally called the “Absurdity Doctrine,” and Google sets it out perfectly:”
Avoiding an Absurd and Unjust Outcome
Image Credit: Shutterstock.
Miciak then describes Google’s definition of the Absurdity Doctrine.
“In situations… the absurdity doctrine permits the court to disregard the plain language of the statute to avoid an absurd and unjust outcome.”
A “Perfect Example of the Doctrine at Work.”
Image Credit: Shutterstock.
“Given that it is patently absurd to think that the duty to “protect and preserve” the Constitution doesn’t encompass “supporting” the Constitution, this would seem like the most perfect example of the doctrine at work in history,” concluded Miciak in his response to Trump’s lawyer’s argument that he had no duty to support the Constitution.
About CREW: Targeting Government Officials Who “Sacrifice the Common Good.”
Image Credit: Shutterstock.
The group CREW, which is attempting to disqualify Trump from the ballot in Colorado state, on their website they are an organization “Using bold legal actions and in-depth investigations…”
“CREW targets government officials who sacrifice the common good to special interests and personal gain.
CREW Alleges Donald Trump Used His Power to Threaten Voters
Image Credit: Shutterstock.
“Throughout the 2020 presidential election, Donald Trump enacted a plan to subvert the election. He fabricated doubts about the integrity of electoral systems and used his power to threaten public officials and anger his supporters,” argues the organization.
Trump Encouraged Voters to “Fight Like Hell.”
Image Credit: Thomas Hengge / Shutterstock.
“The anger built up to January 6th, when tens of thousands of his supporters gathered to ‘Stop the Steal’ where he encouraged them to be ‘wild’ and to ‘fight like hell’ to stop the election certification process,” states CREW.
Trump “Incited an Insurrection and Disqualified Himself From Serving in Any Office.”
Image Credit: Thomas Hengge / Shutterstock.
“The mob that Trump assembled and exhorted proceeded to storm the Capitol building in support of Trump. He incited an insurrection and disqualified himself from serving in any office–including the presidency,” CREW concludes.
Section 3 of the 14th Amendment Has Already Been Successful
Image Credit: Shutterstock.
A New Mexico judge has enforced the 14th Amendment to oust another individual involved in the insurrection effectively. Couy Griffin, a county commissioner in New Mexico, was immediately removed from office upon the ruling and was disqualified under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
Establishes a Robust Precedent for Colorado Lawsuit
Image Credit: Shutterstock.
This case marked the very first court enforcement of Section 3 in over 150 years, establishing a robust precedent for CREW’s lawsuit against Donald Trump in Colorado.
Other Lawsuits Filed in Multiple States
Image Credit: Shutterstock.
Many other states, including Virginia, Connecticut and Minnesota, are trying to disqualify Trump on the same grounds.
The organization, Free Speech for People, has filed a legal challenge on behalf of a group of voters in MN state’s Supreme Court.
Trump has hit back at attempts to bar him under the 14th Amendment, branding the actions as “election interference” while claiming he’s done nothing wrong.
Terrifying Prospects: 12 Moves Trump Could Unleash If Re-elected in 2024
