Eric Columbus Profile picture
Jun 9, 2023 28 tweets 9 min read Read on X
Let’s be clear: the legal process itself is very unlikely to stop Trump from becoming President again. Only the voters—or Trump himself—can do that. 🧵1/
For starters, there’s no guarantee that Trump would be convicted of anything before January 20, 2025. The wheels of justice turn slowly! 2/
And if he hasn't been convicted, courts would almost certainly grant a motion to suspend all pending prosecutions for the duration of his presidency. 3/
Courts will agree with DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel (which opined on this during the Nixon and Clinton presidencies) that you can't prosecute the president because it interferes with his job. (The whole opinion is worth reading.) 4/
justice.gov/d9/olc/opinion… ImageImage
And, of course, to the extent the pending prosecution is federal, President Trump would simply order DOJ to drop the case. But he couldn't do that regarding the state prosecutions in New York and (coming soon) Georgia. 5/
But let's imagine that Trump *is* convicted and imprisoned before Election Day. As most folks know by now, you can still run for President from behind bars. 6/
In 1920, socialist Eugene Debs won 3.4% of the national presidential vote while living in the Atlanta Federal Penitentiary! (His best state was Wisconsin where he snagged 11.5%.) 7/
uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/nation… ImageImage
(Debs fared better in 1912, winning 6% as a free man, which coincidentally was the last time a former president was on the ballot.) 8/
uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/nation… Image
My favorite prison candidate story is that a guy named Keith Judd, serving a 17-year sentence for extortion, somehow won 41% in the West Virginia Democratic primary against President Obama, simply because many WV voters didn't like Obama. 9/
npr.org/sections/thetw…
But how well could Trump govern from prison? Might not that convince Congress to, say, impeach and remove him and let his VP take over? No matter—courts are extremely likely to grant a petition by Trump for a writ of habeas corpus to spring him from prison. 10/
A writ of habeas corpus is a court order granting a convicted prisoner's petition for his release. Habeas law is very complicated, and I'm no expert, but I'm pretty confident that he would win in this unprecedented circumstance. 11/
Trump would argue that he is "in custody in violation of the Constitution, " 28 USC 2241(c)(3), because the myriad duties the Constitution assigns to the President cannot be fulfilled competently from prison. 12/
law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28…
Courts *might* say "Tough luck, you should've thought about that before criming/campaigning." But I think it's much more likely courts (SCOTUS) would bow to the will of the voters and set him free (but he'd need to return to prison after leaving office, barring clemency). 13/
Could Trump simply pardon himself? He couldn't do that for a state prosecution, i.e. in New York or Georgia. It's not clear a self-pardon is valid under *any* circumstance, yet it's also not clear who would have standing to challenge it. 14/
What if Trump gets convicted for violating 18 USC 2071(b)—which was mentioned in the Mar-a-Lago search warrant and which states anyone convicted of violating it is "disqualified from holding any office under the United States"? Very unlikely to work. 15/
law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18… (a)Whoever willfully and un...
The Constitution sets forth qualifications for the presidency, and courts are highly likely to hold that Congress can't add further requirements. For further reading, follow the links here. 16/
reason.com/volokh/2022/08…
One more possibility: the 14th Amendment bars from certain offices persons who "engaged in insurrection or rebellion against [the U.S.], or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof." And 18 USC 2383, titled "Rebellion or insurrection against the U.S.," is very similar. 17/ Section 3. No person shall ...  LII U.S. Code Title 18 PA...
If Trump is indicted and convicted of violating 18 USC 2383 in connection with January 6, could he be barred from office pursuant to the 14th Amendment? Probably not. 18/
As a threshold matter, it's not clear that the relevant language in the 14th Amendment includes the presidency or Trump. Is the presidency an "office . . . under the United States"? Did Trump swear an oath "as an officer of the United States"? Unclear. 19/ Section 3. No person shall ...
Furthermore, the language of Section 2383 and the 14th Amendment is very similar but not identical. A conviction might mean that jurors felt that he "incite[d]" an insurrection, but that's probably not good enough for the 14th Amendment bar. 20/
For much, much more on Section 2383 and the 14th Amendment, read @JoshMBlackman and @SethBTillman. (I have no view on whether they're right.) 21/
reason.com/volokh/2021/02…
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…
The point here is that there are many problems with this theory (as with the others) and courts are likelier to take one of many available offramps rather than rule that the candidate elected by the American people is ineligible to take office. 22/
Finally, as @Delavegalaw pointed out to me, it's theoretically possible that as judge might impose, as a condition of probation, a prohibition on running for office. The Fifth Circuit has actually upheld such a sentence for a former congressman. 23/
casetext.com/case/united-st…
But even if Trump were to be sentenced before Election Day, it strikes me as highly unlikely that a judge would impose such a condition, or that it would be upheld, given that it would throw the 2024 election into chaos. 24/
For more on this possibility, as well as the possibility that Trump might voluntarily withdraw as part of a plea deal, see this @NinoMonea article (h/t @alegalnerd) which I have yet to read. 25/
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf… Image
I bet I'm forgetting something, but that's all for now. Bottom line is that the courts are very unlikely to keep Trump from winning the presidency. It's up to us. 26/
To paraphrase the Zen proverb:
Before Trump indictment: chop wood, carry water. After Trump indictment: chop wood, carry water.
27/
Or in the words of Barack Obama: we are the ones we have been waiting for.
28/end

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Eric Columbus

Eric Columbus Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @EricColumbus

Jun 6, 2024
As a lawyer who represented the @January6thCmte, including filing an amicus brief at Bannon's trial, I'll be delighted when Bannon serves his sentence for blowing off the Committee. Not popping the champagne yet until Bannon loses his emergency appeals. A thread. 1/
Bannon was convicted of contempt of Congress under 2 U.S.C. 192. 2/ Image
Normally, a federal convicted criminal doesn’t get to remain free while he tries to overturn his conviction on appeal. 3/
Read 29 tweets
Mar 29, 2024
Ok now I think I get this motion. DA wants to make crystal-clear that Trump cannot attack his family. Gag order, read fairly, encompasses the DA’s family, but not 100% clear. Judge’s daughter discussed just for optics. Here’s a thread, with caveat that I’m out walking my dog. 1/
Judge’s order gags Trump from attacking, among others, “counsel in this case (other than the DA)” and “family members of any counsel.” Does the parenthetical in the first quote extend to the second? Logic says no. And DA wants judge to so say expressly, to protect his family. 2/
Whereas the original order plainly does *not* extend to the judge’s daughter. The judge is not a “staff member” so neither he nor his daughter are included. 3/ Image
Read 6 tweets
Feb 15, 2024
In its SCOTUS brief in the immunity case, Trump’s team oddly ignored the limited nature of the DC Circuit’s holding—hoping that SCOTUS won’t take an offramp like it did in Trump v. Thompson, a case I worked on for the @January6thCmte. Jack Smith noticed. Let me explain. 1/
Image
Image
2. The DC Circuit specified that its holding applies only to where "a former President has been indicted on federal criminal charges arising from his alleged conspiracy to overturn federal election results and unlawfully overstay his Presidential term." 2/
cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opini…

Image
Image
Trump ignored this in his brief—falsely and repeatedly stating that the DC Circuit resolved much more than he did. Obviously, he wants SCOTUS to feel outraged and take up the case. 3/

Image
Image
Image
Read 17 tweets
Jan 6, 2024
I was working for Congress on January 6, 2021. The night before, my boss, House General Counsel Doug Letter, asked me to be on House floor with him that day. 1/ Image
We had spent months preparing for January 6. In the fall of 2020, anticipating that Trump might not accept defeat, we helped prepare for the House’s role in a contested election. 2/
We were ready for just about every possible (nonviolent) contingency—including governors refusing to certify the election, fake electors, Pence going rogue, the House GOP walking out, and many more. 3/
Read 8 tweets
Sep 27, 2023
Some folks seem to be misunderstanding yesterday's Trump civil fraud decision. First, the judge did NOT find that Trump tried to defraud anyone or that anyone was in fact defraud. But he determined that that doesn't matter for liability under the New York law in question. 1/ Image
In other words, the judge basically said that if you persistently lie about your assets in your financial dealings, you can't continue to do business. Hence he ordered the cancellation and dissolution of the businesses in question. 2/ Image
The judge has yet to rule on whether Trump must pay any specific financial penalty. The NY AG is seeking $250 million in payment to the state. 3/
Read 6 tweets
Aug 24, 2023
Mug shots of politicians, a thread. The gold standard is former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. Confident and smiling without hamming it up. 1/ Image
Former Senator and Vice Presidential candidate John Edwards also smiled, but there's something smarmy about the smile (or maybe just about Edwards himself). 2/ Image
Former Texas Governor Rick Perry tried a tighter smile. Note: no charges stuck on any of our three smilers. Smiling seems to be a good approach. 3/ Image
Read 16 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(