Two legal professionals are urging Congress to invalidate the Electoral College's decision to prevent Donald Trump from assuming the presidency, citing constitutional provisions.

Evan Davis and David Schulte have proposed that Congress invoke the 14th Amendment to block Trump's path to ascending to a second term in office, a legal move they claim is both justified and necessary, as the Daily Wire reports.

Their argument, presented in The Hill on Thursday, is based primarily on Donald Trump's alleged engagement in insurrection. Davis, with experience as the president of the New York City Bar, and Schulte, who brings a legal background from investment banking, present a case rooted in the 14th Amendment's disqualification clause.

The legal mechanism they refer to is designed to disallow those who have participated in an insurrection from holding office. According to Davis and Schulte, the evidence against Trump has already been deliberated in several legal and judicial settings.

Previous Legal, Judicial Proceedings

Key among these settings was Trump's second impeachment trial. On Jan. 13, 2021, the House of Representatives voted 232-197 to charge him with inciting insurrection. However, the Senate acquitted him on Feb. 13, 2021, even though 57 senators voted for conviction.

Beyond federal proceedings, a Colorado court examined the matter and concluded there was a clear indication that Trump engaged in insurrection. This finding was supported by the Colorado Supreme Court although the U.S. Supreme Court chose not to address it.

The House Select Committee's inquiry into the events of Jan. 6 offered substantial witness evidence, according to the lawyers, leading them to conclude definitively Trump's engagement in insurrection.

Constitutional Provision And Legal Implications

Davis and Schulte also invoke an amended provision of the Electoral Act. They suggest that any vote for a disqualified candidate could be considered irregular, involving a constitutional disqualification akin to those based on age or citizenship.

For Congress to act on this suggestion, a formal objection is required. The objection must be backed by at least 20% of members in each chamber of Congress. If the objection garners majority support in both houses, the questionable votes are not counted, potentially leading to an alternative outcome where Kamala Harris could assume the presidency.

Potential Political Outcome and Key Arguments

The authors emphasize that the disqualification stems from actions counter to the Constitution, not merely disobedience to governmental authority.

This line of reasoning is pivotal to their claim, suggesting Trump's actions were in direct violation of constitutional tenets. Hence, they argue for the application of this constitutional safeguard.

Notably, their assertion is that, based on the evidence, Trump's actions meet the criteria for insurrection as defined under legal standards.

Broader Context of Electoral Disputes

This initiative by Davis and Schulte comes amid ongoing debates about the effectiveness and relevance of the Electoral College in modern American politics. Their proposal highlights what they say are constitutional pathways that might be utilized under extraordinary circumstances. However, such a course of action would require substantial political will and cooperative effort across partisan lines. The feasibility of achieving the necessary legislative consensus remains uncertain.

Nonetheless, their published piece adds to the broader discourse on safeguarding democratic principles against perceived breaches by public officials, advocating for a proactive stance by Congress.

Historical Context of Impeachment Trials

Reflecting on the impeachment trials, the debate surrounding them, and the subsequent acquittals provides context for understanding the breadth of how Trump's actions have been reviewed.

The mixed outcomes in various forums, including the Senate and the Colorado judicial proceedings, contribute to the complexity of Davis and Schulte's appeal to Congress.

Their insistence on acting against a backdrop of legal evaluation sets the stage for a potentially unprecedented move should Congress decide to follow their advice.

The Role of Congress Moving Forward

Ultimately, it is Congress that holds the key to implementing the measures suggested, should members decide to act on the insurrection clause of the 14th Amendment.

The decision would involve navigating intricate legal and political landscapes. Still, the clarity provided by previous proceedings may furnish necessary grounds for such action.

This development remains one to watch as political leaders return from the holiday recess to address these pressing issues in the upcoming congressional session.