header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
22 September 2023 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 8041 / Categories: Opinion , Constitutional law , International
printer mail-detail

Insurrection & court intervention: A high-stakes gamble?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
138367
Could legal proceedings stop Trump from standing for election? Michael Zander raises doubts about the attempt to remove the former president from the ballot

Donald Trump has promised he will run for election in 2024 even if he is convicted on any of the serious criminal charges he faces in both federal and state courts. Surprisingly, there is nothing in the US constitution that would bar him from being president after any such conviction. But there is a provision in the constitution that could stop him being elected—by barring him from being a candidate in the first place.

Sweep & force

Section 3 of the 14th amendment provides that no person shall hold public office who, having taken an oath as an officer of the United States to support the constitution of the United States, ‘shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same’.

Section 3 was ratified in 1868 in the aftermath of the Civil War. Its purpose was to prevent secessionists from returning to their previous government positions. A 126-page article in the Pennsylvania

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: No such thing as a ‘Welsh seat’
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
NLJ this week: Jury reform risks justice for efficiency’s sake
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
NLJ this week: Crypto fightback offers ‘new frontier for law’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
NLJ this week: Time to revive the duty to report crime?
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
NLJ this week: When are experts truly ‘necessary’?
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll