Trump's 2024 bid hit with immediate challenge from group behind 'disqualification clause' lawsuits

When Donald Trump announced Tuesday that he was running for the White House again, two groups were already working behind the scenes to mount a national push to get election officials to block him, because of January 6 — too if it is similar - to go to the polls Efforts against other Republicans have failed.
Free Speech For People and Mi Familia Vota are launching a campaign via TrumpIsDisqualified.org to urge secretaries of state and other top election officials to bar the former president from running for office under the US Constitution's Section 3 of the 14th Amendment disclaimer .
The clause, enacted after the Civil War, barred from holding federal office any person who had taken an oath to protect the Constitution -- including a member of Congress -- but who had "participated in an insurrection" against the U.S. or "aid or consolation." has done” to his “enemies”.
ADVERTISEMENT
Free Speech For People previously filed lawsuits against other elected Republicans such as Rep. Madison Cawthorn and Marjorie Taylor Greene, arguing that their actions around Jan. 6 and support for overturning the 2020 election results amounted to disqualifying conduct. Neither Cawthorn nor Greene attended the riots, although Cawthorn previously spoke at a Trump rally; Greene has said she was a "victim" along with other lawmakers.
Free Speech For People said it intends to file similar legal action against Trump but declined to provide further details to ABC News.
Trump has insisted he did nothing wrong in connection with January 6th. A spokesman did not immediately respond to a request for comment about this story.
"I can say that Donald Trump will be legally challenged for his eligibility, but he will also be under scrutiny by secretaries of state and senior election officials, regardless of whether there will be a legal challenge," said John Bonifaz, co-founder and president for freedom of speech for people. "So there is no need for the Secretary of State to be legally challenged to uphold his accountability and bar Donald Trump from voting."
None of the organization's previous lawsuits have resulted in an elected official being ousted from office.
The legal challenge that went furthest was against Greene, which led to a hearing at which she testified before a Georgia administrative judge ruled that she could remain on the ballot.
Nonetheless, both Free Speech For People and Mi Familia Vota insist that Trump's actions surrounding last year's Capitol attack require a response like the campaign they are launching.
PHOTO: Former President Donald Trump answers reporters' questions during an election night party at Mar-a-Lago on November 8, 2022 in Palm Beach, Florida (The Washington Post via Getty Images)
More
Bonifaz told ABC News that secretaries of state and other chief elections have a "duty" to prevent Trump from running for public office under the disqualification clause.
MORE: Should certain politicians be disqualified due to constitutional ban on 'insurgency'?
Héctor Sánchez Barba, executive director and CEO of Mi Familia Vota, told ABC News that the TrumpIsDisqualed.org campaign aligns with her organization's mission to be "at the forefront of protecting democracy and transforming it into a better and more inclusive democracy through citizen participation." make".
PHOTO: Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene speaks to the news media after attending a candidate forum for House Republicans to select a speaker candidate at the US Capitol in Washington, DC on November 14, 2022. (Leah Millis/Reuters)
More
There was only one instance in which an elected official directly connected to the attack on the Capitol was barred from holding public office under the disclaimer clause.
A federal judge in New Mexico has dispelled Otero County commissioner and Cowboys for Trump founder Couy Griffin, citing the disqualification clause -- the only time in 150 years that the provision has been used to disqualify an official to disqualify, and the first time a court ruled that the events of January 6 were a "riot."
In Greene's case, Judge Charles Beaudrot wrote that the burden of proof rested with the challengers and that they "could not prove their case by a preponderance of evidence".
Beaudrot also wrote in his 19-page statement that the evidence in the case was insufficient to determine that Greene "participated in, or provided aid or comfort to, the 14th Amendment insurrection or rebellion against the same." "
ABC News' Tal Axelrod and Isabella Murray contributed to this report.
Trump's 2024 offer was immediately challenged by the group behind "disclaimer" lawsuits and originally appeared on abcnews.go.com

Last News

Ex-Prosecutor Says 7 Words Should Disqualify Mike Pence From Holding Office Again

Ex-Prosecutor Says 7 Words Should Disqualify Mike Pence From Holding Office Again

Putin requires increased production for war although plants already working several shifts

Putin requires increased production for war although plants already working several shifts

Just like Richard Fierro in Colorado Springs, data shows that 64 unarmed civilians have apprehended the gunman in mass shootings since 2000

Just like Richard Fierro in Colorado Springs, data shows that 64 unarmed civilians have apprehended the gunman in mass shootings since 2000