The whole “he has to be convicted of insurrection” argument isn’t even the precedent.
Even more important, the 14th Amendment says nothing about a requirement of conviction for the person to be excluded for eligibility because of insurrection. Specifically mentioning “conviction” as a requirement is used elsewhere in the Constitution for other things (impeachment as an example), so its not on the concept is foreign to the document.
Even more important, the 14th Amendment says nothing about a requirement of conviction for the person to be excluded for eligibility because of insurrection. Specifically mentioning “conviction” as a requirement is used elsewhere in the Constitution for other things (impeachment as an example), so its not on the concept is foreign to the document.