![CNN's senior legal analyst Elie Honig sparred Wednesday night with George Conway over whether former President Donald Trump was ineligible to become president again based on the 14th Amendment. [Screenshot CNN]](https://images.dailycaller.com/image/width=960,height=411,fit=cover,f=auto/https://cdn01.dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/Screenshot-2023-12-28-at-8.15.28-AM-e1703769447362.png "CNN's senior legal analyst Elie Honig sparred Wednesday night with George Conway over whether former President Donald Trump was ineligible to become president again based on the 14th Amendment. [Screenshot CNN]")
CNN’s senior legal analyst Elie Honig sparred Wednesday night with George Conway over whether former President Donald Trump was ineligible to become president again based on the 14th Amendment.
The Colorado Supreme Court ruled Trump was ineligible to appear on the ballot under the 14th Amendment, a decision likely to be appealed to the Supreme Court by Trump. The same question was rejected in Michigan and Minnesota and by secretaries of state in other states.
Conway, who had spoken critically of the former president in the past, said he believes Trump is not permitted to hold office again.
“All the arguments that I have seen against disqualification are bogus, like the one that my friend Elie just mentioned. He suggested the only way that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment could be enforced is through an act of Congress. That’s just not true. There’s nothing in Section 3 that says that. There’s nothing that says that in the other provisions of the 14th Amendment,” Conway argued. “If it were true, that would mean that if Congress repealed tomorrow all of the civil rights acts that were enacted from the time of the Civil War through the ’60s to the present, that would mean under Section 1, that Section 1, which prohibits race discrimination, that would mean that states could immediately start re-segregating their schools and there would be no way to enforce it. That’s just not the law.”
“I mean really, the arguments are pathetically weak, and unless somebody comes up with something better, the Supreme Court is going to have a very difficult time avoiding the consequence of the plain language of the 14th Amendment,” Conway continued.
Honig jumped in to clarify that Conway’s assertion that there are no provisions in the 14th Amendment requiring Congress to pass such laws is false.
“There is language on this specifically in the 14th Amendment. Everyone’s talking about Section 3, which is very important. It says if an officer engages in insurrection or gives comfort to enemies of the country, he’s disqualified. Great. But Section 5 is two sections ahead, which says Congress shall have the power to pass legislation to enact this amendment. So has Congress done that? No. It doesn’t say Congress shall have the power or states can if they feel like it.”
“That’s nonsense. Elie, that’s just complete nonsense,” Conway said. “You don’t need Congress to tell you to follow the Constitution. No more than you need Congress to tell you to follow Section 1’s prohibition in the 14th Amendment that says that you can’t put black kids in a different school.”
“I’m not following that analogy whatsoever,” Honig shot back.
“It’s just not that hard, Elie. I don’t know what you’re talking about,” Conway retorted.
“This says Congress shall have the power —” Honig began before Conway interjected.
“Elie. Elie. Elie. You know better. You read the provision,” Conway argued. “That provision applies to Section 1 as well. Your logic would mean that courts — that states could engage in race discrimination tomorrow if all the civil rights statutes were gone. It’s just nonsense, Elie, and you know better.”
“Not at all. That’s not what it means,” Honig pushed back. “It says Congress shall have the power. You’re trying to add in states.” (RELATED: Colorado GOP Appeals Supreme Court Ruling Outsting Trump From Ballot)
“It’s nonsense, Elie. It’s not an argument. It’s not a serious argument, Elie. I’m sorry, it’s not a serious argument.”
“You’re speaking in conclusory terms. You’re not addressing the actual issue.”
“No, I’m not speaking— You’re the one speaking in conclusory terms, Elliot! Elliot, I made a— I mean, Elie.”
The two continued to debate the subject, with Honig accusing Conway of using “pretzel logic” to try and make his point.
The Michigan Supreme Court’s decision Wednesday to allow the former president to remain on the ballot is a sharp contrast to the Colorado ruling. The Michigan Supreme Court ruled it was “not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this court.”
Democratic Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows is also set to decide in the coming days whether Trump can remain on the state’s ballot. The former president has demanded Bellows recuse herself due to previous tweets from Bellows in which she argued that Jan. 6 was an insurrection and “an unlawful attempt to overthrow the results of a free and fair election.”