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

0:00:01.880 --> 0:00:07.880
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to Brainstuff, a production of iHeartRadio, Hey Brainstuff, Lauren

0:00:07.920 --> 0:00:13.400
<v Speaker 1>Voleebaum Here. In all but four states and territories in

0:00:13.440 --> 0:00:16.920
<v Speaker 1>the US, having been convicted of a felony means that

0:00:16.960 --> 0:00:19.280
<v Speaker 1>you can lose your right to vote in federal and

0:00:19.360 --> 0:00:23.759
<v Speaker 1>local elections, sometimes until you're out of prison, sometimes until

0:00:23.800 --> 0:00:27.440
<v Speaker 1>you complete your full sentence, including parole or probation, and

0:00:27.720 --> 0:00:31.960
<v Speaker 1>sometimes forever. The laws that governed voting are decided by

0:00:31.960 --> 0:00:36.680
<v Speaker 1>each state, but national laws say that a convicted felon

0:00:36.720 --> 0:00:39.520
<v Speaker 1>can run for the highest office in the country, as

0:00:39.600 --> 0:00:43.239
<v Speaker 1>is evidenced by Donald Trump's campaign following his conviction on

0:00:43.360 --> 0:00:49.280
<v Speaker 1>thirty four felony counts. So how can this be? The

0:00:49.320 --> 0:00:53.040
<v Speaker 1>framers of the Constitution made it really hard to disqualify

0:00:53.200 --> 0:00:56.360
<v Speaker 1>anyone from becoming president, and that's meant to be a

0:00:56.360 --> 0:01:02.160
<v Speaker 1>good thing. Okay, let's talk about federal laws. Federal laws

0:01:02.280 --> 0:01:05.720
<v Speaker 1>and the consequences for breaking them are written by Congress,

0:01:06.040 --> 0:01:09.319
<v Speaker 1>but even Congress doesn't have the final word. A federal

0:01:09.400 --> 0:01:11.600
<v Speaker 1>law that's been on the books can still be struck

0:01:11.640 --> 0:01:13.720
<v Speaker 1>down by the Supreme Court if it's found to be

0:01:13.760 --> 0:01:18.800
<v Speaker 1>in violation of the Constitution, and it's the Constitution an

0:01:18.880 --> 0:01:23.119
<v Speaker 1>Article two, Section one, Clause five, specifically that clearly lays

0:01:23.160 --> 0:01:28.399
<v Speaker 1>out the qualifications for the presidency. No person except a

0:01:28.480 --> 0:01:31.199
<v Speaker 1>natural born citizen or a citizen of the United States

0:01:31.240 --> 0:01:33.919
<v Speaker 1>at the time of the adoption of this Constitution shall

0:01:33.959 --> 0:01:37.560
<v Speaker 1>be eligible to the office of President. Neither shall any

0:01:37.560 --> 0:01:40.080
<v Speaker 1>person be eligible to that office who shall have not

0:01:40.120 --> 0:01:43.040
<v Speaker 1>attained to the age of thirty five years and been

0:01:43.200 --> 0:01:49.480
<v Speaker 1>fourteen years resident within the United States. So if Congress

0:01:49.520 --> 0:01:53.320
<v Speaker 1>wanted to write a law that adds qualifications or disqualifications

0:01:53.320 --> 0:01:57.400
<v Speaker 1>for federal office, it would be practically impossible. As we've

0:01:57.440 --> 0:01:59.920
<v Speaker 1>talked about before in our episode about why the age

0:02:00.120 --> 0:02:04.720
<v Speaker 1>limit is thirty five for the article. This episode is

0:02:04.760 --> 0:02:07.320
<v Speaker 1>based on how Stuffworks spoke back in twenty twenty two

0:02:07.440 --> 0:02:10.079
<v Speaker 1>with Derek Muller, a law professor at the University of

0:02:10.160 --> 0:02:14.640
<v Speaker 1>Iowa College of Law. He said, there's a pretty robust

0:02:14.720 --> 0:02:18.520
<v Speaker 1>understanding of law that says Congress cannot add qualifications for

0:02:18.600 --> 0:02:22.600
<v Speaker 1>federal office. You can imagine as a practical matter why

0:02:22.680 --> 0:02:25.480
<v Speaker 1>that would be a problem. Congress could pass a statute

0:02:25.639 --> 0:02:29.040
<v Speaker 1>that disqualifies its political enemies or makes it more difficult

0:02:29.040 --> 0:02:33.760
<v Speaker 1>for its disfavored candidates to win. Even if a federal

0:02:33.840 --> 0:02:37.280
<v Speaker 1>law says that violators will be disqualified from holding office.

0:02:37.480 --> 0:02:40.640
<v Speaker 1>It could be challenged in court, and odds are very

0:02:40.720 --> 0:02:43.160
<v Speaker 1>good that the Supreme Court justices would strike down the

0:02:43.240 --> 0:02:47.160
<v Speaker 1>disqualification part as unconstitutional and let the person run for

0:02:47.200 --> 0:02:53.079
<v Speaker 1>office again. There is, however, a previously little known clause

0:02:53.080 --> 0:02:56.080
<v Speaker 1>in the Constitution that disqualifies people from office who have

0:02:56.120 --> 0:03:02.160
<v Speaker 1>committed one specific crime, insurrection. It comes in Section three

0:03:02.280 --> 0:03:05.320
<v Speaker 1>of the fourteenth Amendment, and it's really worthy, so I'm

0:03:05.320 --> 0:03:07.360
<v Speaker 1>not going to read it in full, but it says

0:03:07.440 --> 0:03:10.320
<v Speaker 1>that if you've previously taken an oath of office to

0:03:10.440 --> 0:03:14.200
<v Speaker 1>support the US government, and then you engaged in insurrection

0:03:14.520 --> 0:03:17.360
<v Speaker 1>or rebellion against the US government or gave aid or

0:03:17.360 --> 0:03:21.079
<v Speaker 1>comfort to its enemies, then you cannot hold office again

0:03:22.280 --> 0:03:24.960
<v Speaker 1>unless Congress puts it to a vote and two thirds

0:03:24.960 --> 0:03:31.040
<v Speaker 1>of both houses vote that you can. Muller said, that's

0:03:31.080 --> 0:03:33.799
<v Speaker 1>the only other place in the Constitution that says this

0:03:33.919 --> 0:03:37.160
<v Speaker 1>is prohibited conduct, and we don't want individuals serving in

0:03:37.160 --> 0:03:42.400
<v Speaker 1>government who have assisted in some sort of rebellion. The

0:03:42.400 --> 0:03:44.840
<v Speaker 1>Fourteenth Amendment was written in the wake of the Civil War,

0:03:45.120 --> 0:03:47.800
<v Speaker 1>when Congress wanted to prevent any officials who served in

0:03:47.800 --> 0:03:52.200
<v Speaker 1>the Confederacy from holding federal or state office again unless

0:03:52.200 --> 0:03:57.440
<v Speaker 1>Congress specifically and broadly approved of them. This disqualification clause

0:03:57.440 --> 0:04:01.440
<v Speaker 1>of the fourteenth Amendment was collecting dust until the January sixth,

0:04:01.520 --> 0:04:05.440
<v Speaker 1>twenty twenty attack on the Capital and accusations that former

0:04:05.480 --> 0:04:10.800
<v Speaker 1>President Trump incited the insurrection. But what exactly would it

0:04:10.840 --> 0:04:14.400
<v Speaker 1>take for Trump or another government official who had previously

0:04:14.440 --> 0:04:17.400
<v Speaker 1>taken an oath to be disqualified from office under the

0:04:17.480 --> 0:04:22.839
<v Speaker 1>fourteenth Amendment. There's a lot of debate. Does the individual

0:04:22.960 --> 0:04:26.240
<v Speaker 1>need to be convicted of inciting or supporting a rebellion?

0:04:26.880 --> 0:04:30.440
<v Speaker 1>Does Congress have to pass a separate enabling statuette that

0:04:30.600 --> 0:04:34.400
<v Speaker 1>identifies the individuals who participated in the insurrection or rebellion.

0:04:35.200 --> 0:04:38.520
<v Speaker 1>There are even people who question whether the disqualification applies

0:04:38.560 --> 0:04:43.480
<v Speaker 1>to the presidency at all. Muller added that the framers

0:04:43.480 --> 0:04:46.919
<v Speaker 1>of the Constitution consciously set a very low bar of

0:04:47.080 --> 0:04:52.680
<v Speaker 1>entry for running for office. Unlike European aristocracies, American officeholders

0:04:52.760 --> 0:04:56.600
<v Speaker 1>didn't have to own land or be wealthy. That's the

0:04:56.600 --> 0:05:01.800
<v Speaker 1>beauty of American style democracy, and it goes for those

0:05:01.800 --> 0:05:05.960
<v Speaker 1>convicted of felonies and other crimes. In the nineteen twenty

0:05:06.000 --> 0:05:10.520
<v Speaker 1>presidential election, the outspoken socialist Eugene Debs campaigned for president

0:05:10.600 --> 0:05:13.960
<v Speaker 1>from a federal prison in Georgia. Adebs was charged and

0:05:14.040 --> 0:05:17.839
<v Speaker 1>convicted of sedition in nineteen eighteen for his fiery speeches

0:05:17.880 --> 0:05:22.520
<v Speaker 1>denouncing America's participation in World War One. Running as convict

0:05:22.600 --> 0:05:25.680
<v Speaker 1>number nine sixty five three, Debs won three point five

0:05:25.720 --> 0:05:30.880
<v Speaker 1>percent of the vote in nineteen twenty. More recently, the

0:05:30.920 --> 0:05:34.560
<v Speaker 1>fringe politician Lyndon LaRouche ran for president three times in

0:05:34.560 --> 0:05:37.760
<v Speaker 1>the nineteen nineties and early two thousands after serving seven

0:05:37.839 --> 0:05:43.440
<v Speaker 1>years at a federal prison for defrauding the irs. But okay,

0:05:44.360 --> 0:05:46.960
<v Speaker 1>just about anybody can run for political office in America.

0:05:47.400 --> 0:05:51.520
<v Speaker 1>But is there a difference between running and winning? If

0:05:51.560 --> 0:05:55.040
<v Speaker 1>a criminal or suspected trader is elected to office, are

0:05:55.080 --> 0:05:58.120
<v Speaker 1>there other ways to remove them or disqualify them from

0:05:58.200 --> 0:06:03.440
<v Speaker 1>running again? Ya impeachment being the big one. According to

0:06:03.480 --> 0:06:07.200
<v Speaker 1>the Constitution, Congress has the authority to launch impeachment proceedings

0:06:07.240 --> 0:06:10.719
<v Speaker 1>against all civil officers of the United States. If a

0:06:10.760 --> 0:06:13.520
<v Speaker 1>majority of the House votes to impeach, that's followed by

0:06:13.560 --> 0:06:16.560
<v Speaker 1>a trial in the Senate. If the Senate votes to

0:06:16.640 --> 0:06:20.239
<v Speaker 1>convict the official of treason, bribery or other high crimes

0:06:20.240 --> 0:06:25.600
<v Speaker 1>and misdemeanors, the person is removed from office. Only twenty

0:06:25.640 --> 0:06:29.919
<v Speaker 1>civil officers have ever been impeached, fifteen federal judges, three presidents,

0:06:30.000 --> 0:06:34.719
<v Speaker 1>a cabinet secretary, and a US senator. Only eight of

0:06:34.760 --> 0:06:37.800
<v Speaker 1>this group, all federal judges, were convicted and removed from

0:06:37.800 --> 0:06:42.920
<v Speaker 1>office by the Senate. Disqualification from future office is an

0:06:42.920 --> 0:06:46.480
<v Speaker 1>optional punishment with impeachment. In its history, the Senate has

0:06:46.520 --> 0:06:50.159
<v Speaker 1>only barred three people from serving again in the federal government, again,

0:06:50.240 --> 0:06:55.040
<v Speaker 1>all federal judges. There's a cheap joke in here somewhere

0:06:55.120 --> 0:06:59.120
<v Speaker 1>about how all politicians are criminals anyway, But of course

0:06:59.320 --> 0:07:01.920
<v Speaker 1>who we elect to represent us and our government is

0:07:02.200 --> 0:07:06.200
<v Speaker 1>very serious. It's a good thing that our laws don't

0:07:06.200 --> 0:07:10.080
<v Speaker 1>place many restrictions on who can run for office. After all,

0:07:10.480 --> 0:07:13.120
<v Speaker 1>we the people should decide who should be in office

0:07:13.240 --> 0:07:16.160
<v Speaker 1>with our vote. It's up to us to look at

0:07:16.160 --> 0:07:21.200
<v Speaker 1>candidates earnestly and fully and decide whether their behavior represents

0:07:21.280 --> 0:07:29.480
<v Speaker 1>us and whether it should bar them from office. Today's

0:07:29.520 --> 0:07:32.200
<v Speaker 1>episode is based on the article does a criminal conviction

0:07:32.360 --> 0:07:35.600
<v Speaker 1>bar you from running for US President? On HowStuffWorks dot Com,

0:07:35.640 --> 0:07:38.840
<v Speaker 1>written by Dave Ruse brain Stuff is production of iHeartRadio

0:07:38.880 --> 0:07:41.360
<v Speaker 1>in partnership with HowStuffWorks dot Com and is produced by

0:07:41.360 --> 0:07:45.640
<v Speaker 1>Tyler Klang. Four more podcasts from iHeartRadio. Visit the iHeartRadio app,

0:07:45.720 --> 0:07:48.560
<v Speaker 1>Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.