You're missing something. In America you must be PROVEN guilty of the crime. You liberals trying to find a way to keep Trump off the b****t would actually go against everything that makes America by having to prove someone committed a crime and saying he doesn't have to be proven he has committed the said crime is pathetic and un American. But the liberals have tried to toss out the constitution on numerous occasions the last few years. If you don't like the constitution then move to somewhere that doesn't protect it's citizens with laws.

Answered above. In CO, judges have made the determination that trump "engaged" in r*******n or i**********n. Not guilt/innocence, but activity based engagement.

In Maine, it's Secretary of State.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/12/15/maine-14th-amendment-trump-00132136

https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/lsb/lsb10569


https://theconversation.com/why-14th-amendment-bars-trump-from-office-a-constitutional-law-scholar-explains-principle-behind-colorado-supreme-court-ruling-219763

In FL:
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4171623-florida-lawyer-files-challenge-to-disqualify-trump-from-2024-race-citing-14th-amendment/

It's not about anyone, anytime, any offense. This discussion on 14A refers only and specifically to r*******n and i**********n. 14A was enacted after the civil war to offer a process to keep s******n sympathizers off state b****ts.

Each state has their own procedures; some delegate the authority to v****g commission, some to legislature and some to courts. No one is determining that trump is guilty of any crime because it's not necessary under this section of 14A. A determination of engaged in i**********n or r*******n is the only criteria. Defendant is offered due process as described in analysis included below.

Historically, due process ordinarily entailed a jury trial. The jury determined the facts and the judge enforced the law. In past two centuries, however, states have developed a variety of institutions and procedures for adjudicating disputes. Making room for these innovations, the Court has determined that due process requires, at a minimum: (1) notice; (2) an opportunity to be heard; and (3) an impartial tribunal. Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank (1950).





https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/articles/amendment-xiv/clauses/701

Just because no one was charged with a federal offense under the i**********n statute, that does not mean there was no i**********n as that term is commonly used. The dictionary defines "i**********n" as "a violent uprising against an authority or government." Clearly, 1*6 was "violent." And, it was an "uprising against an authority or government" in that it attempted to stop Congress from certifying an e******n, as required by the Constitution. Consequently, 1*6 was an i**********n.