Debate Over Enforcing Section Three of the Constitution
Debate Over Enforcing Section Three of the Constitution

Debate Over Enforcing Section Three of the Constitution

News summary

The enforcement of Section Three of the Constitution, which excludes insurrectionists from future office, is being met with objections from critics. One argument is that enforcing Section Three could provoke substantial political resistance and violence, which is considered to be too dangerous. Another argument is that enforcing Section Three would be undemocratic as it interferes with the right to vote and is contrary to democratic principles. The argument against enforcing Section Three is ultimately an objection to what the Constitution says and does, and it is considered as an anti-constitutional argument. The objection comes in many rhetorical forms, but the substance of the objection is always pretty much the same. The article 'The Sweep and Force of Section Three' argues that former president Donald J. Trump is constitutionally disqualified from holding the office of president again, and that this has major implications for the national political life today, as it is widely cited in current litigation about the enforcement of Section Three.

Story Coverage
Bias Distribution
100% Right
Information Sources
3faf55e0-d733-4e1c-95a1-3f2ac979f7cd
Right 100%
Coverage Details
Total News Sources
1
Left
0
Center
0
Right
1
Unrated
0
Last Updated
107 days ago
Bias Distribution
100% Right

Open Story Timeline

Story timeline 1Story timeline 2Story timeline 3Story timeline 4Story timeline 5Story timeline 6Story timeline 7Story timeline 8Story timeline 9Story timeline 10Story timeline 11Story timeline 12Story timeline 13Story timeline 14

Analyze and predict the
development of events

Related News
Daily Index

Negative

20Serious

Neutral

Optimistic

Positive

Ask VT AI
Story Coverage
Subscribe

Stay in the know

Get the latest news, exclusive insights, and curated content delivered straight to your inbox.

Related News
Recommended News