Boy oh boy, have we got a legal showdown coming in New York State later this year. Two nonprofit groups who don’t like to share all of their donors, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) and Free Speech For People, are going all guns-a-blazing to stop the former president from appearing on Republican primary ballots because of his role in the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection. Don’t worry, we’re here to give you the scoop with a side of humor.
Now, these two nonprofits have come up with a plan that rivals any conspiracy theory movie plot. They’ve got it all covered, letters to state election officials? Check! Voter lawsuits and state election board complaints? Check! Oh, and let’s not forget about their multipronged legal strategies to challenge Trump across the country under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. These folks are not messing around.
You see, Section 3 disqualifies any “officer of the United States” from future public office who, after taking an oath to support the U.S. Constitution, has “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against” the country. And, attorneys at these ever-so-charming groups argue that Trump’s role before and during the Jan. 6 riot is evidence he “engaged in insurrection.” Seems pretty straightforward, right?
Well, not so fast, opponents are firing back with their argument that state elections officials have a ministerial role that does not allow them to bar candidates under the constitution. Plus, they’re going to argue that Trump did not engage in an “insurrection.” Oh, and did they mention that Section 3 should not apply to a candidate before an election? Legal scholars are even throwing in their two cents by raising questions about whether a former president who has never served in another office counts as an “officer” under the clause. Yup, we’re confused too.
Of course, the Trump camp has something to say about all this legal jargon, and boy are they not holding back. They’re calling these wonderful, undemocratic organizations out on their blatant election interference and tampering. According to Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung, “They are not even trying to hide it anymore, and it is sad they want to deprive the American people of choosing Donald Trump – the overwhelming front-runner by far – as their President. History will not judge them kindly.” Judges and election officials take note.
But wait! There’s more! Opponents warn of the damage judges or election officials would do to the electoral process if they intervene to deny Republican voters the option of choosing Trump after much of the campaign season has passed. We’re talking a practical level of cynicism and destruction that is beyond comprehension, says conservative attorney James Bopp, who represented two members of Congress last year whose ballot access was unsuccessfully challenged under Section 3. This is better than any drama series on TV.
Of course, Republican rivals could use this to their advantage and leave Trump in the dust. They can argue that Trump’s electability in a general election is at stake, and all this courtroom drama about his role in Jan. 6 is not helping his case. But, lawyers on both sides of the issue say if a judge ruled that Section 3 applies in any state, the case would likely be immediately appealed to federal court and potentially fast-tracked to the Supreme Court for review. Hello, legal drama and intrigue!
This is where things get complicated, folks. CREW and Free Speech For People are nonpartisan nonprofits, but they have a long history of working in concert with Democratic policy priorities. According to an anonymous person familiar with Democratic donor Reid Hoffman’s donations, he supports Free Speech For People’s work on this issue. Plus, Free Speech For People has been working with a Latino voting group that ran ads against Trump in the 2020 election. The plot thickens.
And we’ve got more drama, folks. Gerard Magliocca, a law professor at Indiana University, has written extensively on Section 3 and advised both groups now seeking to apply the clause to Trump. He has noted that Section 3 was clearly applied to Jefferson Davis, the former president of the Confederate States who did not fight personally in the Civil War and was not convicted of a crime. This ongoing Justice Department investigation of Trump for his role in the Jan. 6 attack could also factor into how courts, including the Supreme Court, view the Section 3 claim. Talk about a nail-biting ending.
So, folks, there you have it–a legal showdown that rivals any thriller novel or conspiracy theory movie. Stay tuned for the next episode of “As the Legal Battle Turns.”

Serious News: washingtonpost