Why Can a Convicted Felon Run for U.S. President?

sometimes forever. The laws that governed voting are decided by each state, but national laws say that a convicted felon can run for the highest office in the country, as is evidenced by Donald Trump's campaign following his conviction on thirty four felony counts. So how can this be? The framers of the Constitution made it really hard to disqualify anyone from becoming president, and that's meant to be a

good thing. Okay, let's talk about federal laws. Federal laws and the consequences for breaking them are written by Congress, but even Congress doesn't have the final word. A federal law that's been on the books can still be struck down by the Supreme Court if it's found to be in violation of the Constitution, and it's the Constitution an Article two, Section one, Clause five, specifically that clearly lays

out the qualifications for the presidency. No person except a natural born citizen or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this Constitution shall be eligible to the office of President. Neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall have not attained to the age of thirty five years and been fourteen years resident within the United States. So if Congress wanted to write a law that adds qualifications or disqualifications

for federal office, it would be practically impossible. As we've talked about before in our episode about why the age limit is thirty five for the article. This episode is based on how Stuffworks spoke back in twenty twenty two with Derek Muller, a law professor at the University of Iowa College of Law. He said, there's a pretty robust understanding of law that says Congress cannot add qualifications for federal office. You can imagine as a practical matter why

that would be a problem. Congress could pass a statute that disqualifies its political enemies or makes it more difficult for its disfavored candidates to win. Even if a federal law says that violators will be disqualified from holding office. It could be challenged in court, and odds are very good that the Supreme Court justices would strike down the disqualification part as unconstitutional and let the person run for

office again. There is, however, a previously little known clause in the Constitution that disqualifies people from office who have

committed one specific crime, insurrection. It comes in Section three of the fourteenth Amendment, and it's really worthy, so I'm not going to read it in full, but it says that if you've previously taken an oath of office to support the US government, and then you engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the US government or gave aid or comfort to its enemies, then you cannot hold office again unless Congress puts it to a vote and two thirds

of both houses vote that you can. Muller said, that's the only other place in the Constitution that says this is prohibited conduct, and we don't want individuals serving in government who have assisted in some sort of rebellion. The Fourteenth Amendment was written in the wake of the Civil War, when Congress wanted to prevent any officials who served in the Confederacy from holding federal or state office again unless

Congress specifically and broadly approved of them. This disqualification clause of the fourteenth Amendment was collecting dust until the January sixth, twenty twenty attack on the Capital and accusations that former President Trump incited the insurrection. But what exactly would it take for Trump or another government official who had previously taken an oath to be disqualified from office under the

fourteenth Amendment. There's a lot of debate. Does the individual need to be convicted of inciting or supporting a rebellion? Does Congress have to pass a separate enabling statuette that identifies the individuals who participated in the insurrection or rebellion. There are even people who question whether the disqualification applies to the presidency at all. Muller added that the framers of the Constitution consciously set a very low bar of

entry for running for office. Unlike European aristocracies, American officeholders didn't have to own land or be wealthy. That's the beauty of American style democracy, and it goes for those convicted of felonies and other crimes. In the nineteen twenty presidential election, the outspoken socialist Eugene Debs campaigned for president from a federal prison in Georgia. Adebs was charged and convicted of sedition in nineteen eighteen for his fiery speeches

denouncing America's participation in World War One. Running as convict number nine sixty five three, Debs won three point five percent of the vote in nineteen twenty. More recently, the fringe politician Lyndon LaRouche ran for president three times in the nineteen nineties and early two thousands after serving seven years at a federal prison for defrauding the irs. But okay, just about anybody can run for political office in America.

But is there a difference between running and winning? If a criminal or suspected trader is elected to office, are there other ways to remove them or disqualify them from running again? Ya impeachment being the big one. According to the Constitution, Congress has the authority to launch impeachment proceedings against all civil officers of the United States. If a majority of the House votes to impeach, that's followed by

a trial in the Senate. If the Senate votes to convict the official of treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors, the person is removed from office. Only twenty civil officers have ever been impeached, fifteen federal judges, three presidents, a cabinet secretary, and a US senator. Only eight of this group, all federal judges, were convicted and removed from office by the Senate. Disqualification from future office is an

optional punishment with impeachment. In its history, the Senate has only barred three people from serving again in the federal government, again, all federal judges. There's a cheap joke in here somewhere about how all politicians are criminals anyway, But of course who we elect to represent us and our government is very serious. It's a good thing that our laws don't place many restrictions on who can run for office. After all, we the people should decide who should be in office

with our vote. It's up to us to look at candidates earnestly and fully and decide whether their behavior represents us and whether it should bar them from office. Today's episode is based on the article does a criminal conviction bar you from running for US President? On HowStuffWorks dot Com, written by Dave Ruse brain Stuff is production of iHeartRadio in partnership with HowStuffWorks dot Com and is produced by

Tyler Klang. Four more podcasts from iHeartRadio. Visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.