Reconstruction-Era Law Could Keep Trump Off The Ballot In 6 Southern States

[Nevilledog]

Link to tweet

Tweet text:

S.V. Dáte
@svdate
NEW — A Reconstruction era law let six states, including North Carolina, Florida and Georgia, back into the union on the condition they keep insurrectionists from holding office.

Now that law could keep Trump off the 2024 ballot, should he run.

huffpost.com
Reconstruction-Era Law Could Keep Trump Off The Ballot In 6 Southern States
The language letting them back into the Union required them to enforce the 14th Amendment’s ban on insurrectionists in federal or state office.
9:41 AM · Jan 16, 2022

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-reconstruction-ballots_n_61e0e1b3e4b0e612f6f9b630

Should former President Donald Trump run for the White House again, an obscure Reconstruction-era law could keep him off the ballot in six southern states, including North Carolina, Georgia and Florida, because of his incitement of the Jan. 6 insurrection.

The third section of the 14th Amendment prohibits people who swore to defend the Constitution, but who subsequently took part in an insurrection against the United States, from holding state or federal office. Other language in that post-Civil War amendment, though, makes many experts believe that only Congress can enforce the ban, which means Senate Republicans could block any such action.

But the 1868 law that readmitted the six states put the burden on them to keep those who have been involved in insurrections from seeking office — potentially making it considerably easier to keep Trump off their primary and general election ballots.

“It’s still on the books,” said Gerard Magliocca, a law professor at Indiana University who studies the Reconstruction period. He added that the language could help those seeking to disqualify Trump and other candidates who appeared to encourage the Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the Capitol. “The law is still there. And it could be appealed to.”

*snip*

[Merlot]

1. So laws are supposed to stop him? They'll just make new laws.

[Captain Zero]

8. Oh they will repeal the laws but it's an admission

THAT HE IS A SEDITIONIST !

[Pantagruel]

2. Seems a bit of a longshot

but we need to wage guerrilla war on those seditionists. Tie them up in court, distract them and highlight their disloyalty to the constitution.

[onecaliberal]

3. Tromp and republicans ARE above the law.

Trump commits crimes on the daily. And he has for years.

[Talitha]

4. He's a Florida resident now - very interesting.

[BComplex]

5. It needs to keep Cawthorn off the ballot in North Carolina then!

We sure as hell don't need that piece of shit representing us!

[moondust]

11. And maybe others

in Congress if found by the 1/6 committee or DOJ to have been in cahoots with the seditious conspirators.

[Budi]

6. Kudos to the scholars of our Constitution. Its been a lesson for us all.

I would not have known of this, if not for them.

Go for it & hope something sticks.

[DENVERPOPS]

16. It seems to me

that enforcing this law would all hinge on him being convicted as an insurrectionist, rather than promoting a casual group of tourists to tour the Capitol....

[Beakybird]

7. Roberts verbally dismissed OSHA as having any authority to require mandates 'cuz it's 50 years old.

This was in verbal arguments.

[PXR-5]

9. TFG is viewed as

the "defender" of the Constitution as opposed to the "Socialist" Joe Biden.

At least that's how many think around here in NC.

[Gore1FL]

10. I submit the states never had to come "back into the Union." The war proved they never left. nt

[intheozone]

12. Can the law keep Mo Brooks out of the Senate? nt

[Fiendish Thingy]

13. Not a chance without an actual criminal conviction for insurrection or sedition. Nt

[Bayard]

14. I don't think it matters how old a law is,

If its still on the books. Right, lawyers?

Go fer it!

[bucolic_frolic]

15. Pure fantasy

Jeff Davis could still get on those ballots.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

17. Has he been proven to have been involved in an insurrection?

Have I missed something here?

[budkin]

18. Yeah right

That will NEVER happen

[onenote]

19. Interesting that there is no cite or link to the wording of the 1868 law.

I believe it is a reference to the Reconstruction Acts. There were four such acts, only one of which was enacted in 1868. As best as I can determine, there is nothing in that particular act relating to the third section of the 14th amendment. There are references to the then pending 14th Amendment (and the third section thereof) in at least one of the earlier Reconstruction Acts, passed in 1867. Moreover, there is nothing in any of the Reconstruction Acts, as best i can tell, that singles out six of the Confederate states.

Indeed, it is curious that the article suggests that only six former Confederate states (Alabama, Florida, NC, SC, GA, LA) would be impacted because they are the only Confederate states readmitted before the 14th Amendment was ratified. In fact, the 14th Amendment was ratified on July 9, 1868 and Alabama and Georgia were readmitted after that date and Louisiana and South Carolina were readmitted on that date. On the other hand, Tennessee and Arkansas aren't mentioned, but they were both readmitted before the ratification of the 14th Amendment.

In any event, if the 1868 law being referenced is actually one of the 1867 Reconstruction Acts, the language of that Act appears merely to require that the Confederate states ratify the 14th amendment, which would seem to do nothing more than make them subject to it in the same way as other states.

Here are the Reconstruction Acts in case someone wants to look for language consistent with the article.
https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/1867-reconstruction-acts/