double jeopardy?

actions create consequences

I began this substack because I fear we too rarely understand that our own actions (collective or individual) sometimes set into motion things that we don’t anticipate or appreciate. I also recognise I don’t have all the answers but I know many truly thoughtful folks and hope to engage more who can help all of us think more clearly.

I received a most interesting pushback today on my column several weeks ago about former president Trump being vacated from the Colorado primary ballot. At the time, I commented that I did not understand why he was eligible because of the Insurrection Clause of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. For the record, I would have raised the same question following similar behaviour had the individual been Trump, Franklin Pierce, Harry Truman, Barack Obama, or anyone else. I am always mindful that law, if truly rule by law, applies equally to all. Seems a bedrock principle to me, stated in this instance as

“No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.” (italics added)

The argument I received revolved around whether removing Trump from the primary ballot did not constitute double jeopardy, a condition prohibited by the Fifth Amendment as stated