Democrats quietly explore barring Trump from office over Jan. 6

Calls for Congress to take steps to strip Trump of his eligibility, which reached a crescendo in the aftermath of the Jan. 6 riot, have since decreased.

ADVERTISEMENT. Raskin, a former constitutional law professor, served as a House manager during Trump's impeachment trial over his role in the Jan. 6 attack.

Days after Trump's acquittal in the Senate, Raskin discussed the constitutional provision in a press interview, saying Trump was "Right in the bullseye middle of that group."

Most constitutional scholars who spoke to The Hill think the provision is not "Self-executing." In practical terms, that means applying Section 3 to Trump would require an additional step by lawmakers to make the 14th Amendment operative.

One bill, introduced by Rep. after Trump's Senate impeachment trial last February, would permit the Attorney General to make the case before a three-judge panel that an office holder had violated the provision and should be barred from future office.

One pro-democracy group, Free Speech For People, has mounted a pressure campaign on top state elections officials to apply the 14th Amendment to Trump should he run again.

According to Tribe of Harvard, if lawsuits arose over Trump's eligibility in 2024, the outcome of that litigation would likely hinge on whether or not a neutral fact-finder setup by Congress had previously determined that Trump's role in the Jan. 6 attack triggered Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/588489-democrats-quietly-explore-barring-trump-from-office-over-jan-6