Donald Trump and the 14th Amendment

Insurrection was not criminalized until the most recent law was enacted, after World War II. It is clear that the Constitution did not then anticipate, let alone require, a criminal conviction. Equally clear is that the factual finding of “insurrection” by a district court judge in a civil action that afforded Mr. Trump due process is more than sufficient to support the Colorado Supreme Court’s opinion.

Nancy Luque, Washington

The Dec. 21 editorial on the 14th Amendment argued that “Not only has Mr. Trump not been convicted of insurrection either by a jury of his peers or from the bench by a judge; he hasn’t even been charged with it.” The assumption that a criminal charge of insurrection is relevant to the disability imposed by Section 3 misreads the history of the 14th Amendment.

When Congress adopted the amendment in 1866, it did so in the context of the plethora of pardons being issued by President Andrew Johnson to Confederate officers who had previously served in either Congress or the U.S. Army. Because of these pardons, these officers could not be charged. Congress knew this and focused the language of Section 3 exclusively on participation in an insurrection rather than on being charged or convicted of it. The effect was to prevent officers who had been pardoned or would be pardoned in the future from returning to military service or holding any other federal office, even though they could not be charged or convicted.

There might be other reasons for courts to refrain from disqualifying former president Donald Trump, but the fact that he has not been charged or convicted is not a valid one.

William C. Lane, Fairfax

Regarding Ruth Marcus’s Dec. 21 op-ed, “The Supreme Court should keep Trump on Colorado’s ballot”:

The 14th Amendment disqualifies, besides insurrectionists, those who have “given aid or comfort to the enemies” of the United States. The country has many enemies, whom many things might comfort. For example, efforts to ostracize Israel surely comfort Iran. What’s to stop partisan attempts to bar candidates for any act that might comfort some enemy?

Once a trend to disqualify opponents instead of defeating them at the polls starts, it’s hard to see where it stops.

Ilya Shlyakhter, Belmont, Mass.

The editorial, Ruth Marcus’s column and the Colorado ruling on the 14th Amendment are akin to the quote often attributed to Vladimir Lenin that the capitalist system will end as capitalists sell the rope that will hang them.

Former president Donald Trump has mastered the strategy of doing wrong, violating people’s rights, ignoring the law and the Constitution, and deftly selling himself as the victim, the representative of the poor and downtrodden. Mr. Trump has clearly stated that every matter pending against him should be deferred until he gets a chance to be elected, weaponize the Justice Department against those with the temerity to seek to hold him to account, and pardon himself and his co-conspirators.

I’ve learned that justice delayed is justice denied. In this instance, delaying justice might be fatal to our democracy.

Herb Levy, Charlottesville

The Dec. 21 editorial was an excellent description of the complex 14th Amendment issue regarding eligibility for public office. However, this question does not apply solely to former president Donald Trump.

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), a candidate for reelection in 2024, has sworn an oath to the Constitution, but on Jan. 6, 2021, he also publicly raised his fist in support of the insurrection unfolding in front of him on the steps of the U.S. Capitol. Under the 14th Amendment, is he eligible to appear on the 2024 Missouri ballot?

The same eligibility question should be asked of other current and former senators, members of the House, Cabinet members, administration officials and anyone who might be a candidate for election to any national, state or local public office.

Jack McAndrews, Fairfax

The people have a right to decide whether Donald Trump should be able to be president again. Helpfully, for those worried about judicial overreach, the people have stated their view of the matter in Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. It says people who take an oath to support the Constitution and engage in insurrection against it are disqualified from office unless two-thirds of Congress says otherwise.

Due process does apply. And the Colorado courts have followed due process by finding acts of insurrection by Mr. Trump in violation of his oath. Thus concluding, consistent with the constitutional powers the people have delegated to the states, that he is not qualified for office in Colorado.

Accordingly, if this U.S. Supreme Court is the originalist and conservative states-rights gang some of its members claim it is, Mr. Trump is barred from office in Colorado, unless two out of three congressional representatives vote that he is eligible. Any other outcome would be judicial overreach.

Timothy Pemberton, Springfield

If our democracy didn’t hang in the balance, Ruth Marcus’s legal argument favoring due process as a precondition to disqualification by the 14th Amendment should prove decisive, even in the face of the plain meaning of Section 3. If you swear the oath and engage in acts to overthrow the Constitution, you do not qualify to run for office or hold it. But, as an attorney, I digress in legalisms that must apply under a democratic constitution establishing the rule of law.

Exhaustive testimony presented to the Colorado court established that then-President Donald Trump’s actions and statements leading up to and on Jan. 6, 2021, left no reasonable doubt that he engaged in conspiracy to overturn the election, the will of the people and the Constitution. He did everything in his power to coerce his vice president to unleash chaos by betraying the oath he took to uphold the Constitution.

Mr. Trump and his crowd have proved they will always play off the conscience of good people in their ruthless pursuit of power. Now is the time for all good journalists to come to the aid of their country — while we still have one.

Robert E. Honig, Potomac