Republican Bryant “Corky” Messner’s attempt to prohibit former President Donald Trump from New Hampshire’s 2024 primary ballot is receiving a cold shoulder from the state’s top GOP leaders.
New Hampshire’s Republican Gov. Chris Sununu, a vocal critic of President Trump, has clarified that he will not be involved in the issue.
“The Governor first heard about this effort over the weekend. The Governor is not making any attempt or assisting any effort to keep anyone off the ballot,” Mr. Sununu’s spokesman told Fox News in a statement.
“He has not spoken to and has nothing to do with Mr. Messner’s actions … Providing he (Trump) follows the same rules as all other candidates, the Governor doesn’t expect ballot access will be a problem for the former president.”
Mr. Messner has met with New Hampshire’s Republican Secretary of State Dave Scanlan who is responsible for overseeing elections in the state.
Mr. Scanlan’s office requested Mr. Formella’s office to advise them “regarding the meaning” of Section 3 and the provision’s “potential applicability” for the 2024 elections. “The Attorney General’s Office is now carefully reviewing the legal issues involved.”
Chris Ager, the state GOP chairman, called Mr. Messner a “friend” whose opinions and judgment he respects. “But I totally disagree with him on this issue,” he said, according to Fox News.
Legal Debate Over Trump’s Qualification
Some legal scholars claim that the 14th Amendment could be used to block President Trump’s reelection bid for 2024.The scholars insisted that Section 3 is “self-executing” and operates as an immediate disqualification from office without requiring any additional action from Congress.
Section 3 also “supersedes” many other constitutional rules in case of conflict with them, including the due process clause and also the free speech provisions of the First Amendment, they said, while adding that the section remains an “enforceable” part of the Constitution not limited by the Civil War.
However, some have pointed out that using the 14th Amendment to block President Trump’s reelection bid may not be possible.
“It wasn’t intended as a general provision empowering one party to disqualify the leading candidate of the other party in any future elections.”
“If the disqualification had been intended as a general rule applicable to all future elections, it would have been essential to designate the appropriate decision maker, the procedures, and the criteria for making so important a decision.”
However, the law provides no such mechanism for determining whether a candidate is disqualified, he said. Mr. Dershiowitz warned that if President Trump were to be disqualified from running for the 2024 election by any individual or institution linked to Democrats and the matter is not resolved by the Supreme Court, “there would be a constitutional crisis.”
“The Constitution articulated limited qualifications for presidential eligibility. Beyond those neutral criteria, the decision should be made by voters, who are free to consider the participation of a candidate in activities with which they disagree,” he stated.
“Because the 14th Amendment is not explicit on how you determine whether someone participated in an insurrection,” he said. “If they had been convicted of that in a court of law, then I can understand how you can use it as a predicate for prohibiting people from running for office.”
“But there is a real serious question, if that conviction has not taken place, whether the Congress can have a finding, or the Senate can have a finding that they are guilty of insurrection and whether that’s sufficient. So, it’s unresolved.”
The Senate had acquitted President Trump from the impeachment charge of inciting an insurrection. Though there have been arguments that Congress could decide to bar him from elections through a simple majority in the House and the Senate, the U.S. Constitution prohibits such moves.
