• @Saganaki
    link
    39 months ago

    The argument I’ve seen is that the condition part of the clause (insurrection) by language only applies to the bit after “who, having previously…”

    Basically, the argument goes “It says you can’t be President or Vice President if you did insurrection while an officer of the US”—but it doesn’t say you can’t be President if you did insurrection while president of the US.

    To be clear: I think it’s fucking idiotic and against the spirit of the law—but I’m no lawyer/legal expert.