As the Colorado Supreme Court wrote, January 6 meets the bar for insurrection āunder any viable definitionā of the term. The legal scholar Mark Graber, who has closely studied the Fourteenth Amendmentās history, argues that āinsurrectionā should be understood broadlyāan act of organized resistance to government authority motivated by a āpublic purpose.ā That certainly describes the Capitol riot, in which a violent mob attacked law enforcement and threatened members of Congress and the vice president in order to block the rightful counting of the electoral vote and illegally secure the victory of the losing candidate. The historical record also suggests that the amendmentās requirement that a prospective officeholder must have āengaged in insurrectionā should also be understood broadlyāmeaning that Trumpās speech on the Ellipse that morning and his encouragement of the rioters while they smashed their way through the Capitol more than fit the bill.
I suggest that you read up on it a little more. That article 3 is self-executing is not a controversial or extreme opinion and is well within the mainstream of legal scholarship. The SCOTUS may rule that it isnāt, but thatās going to be a tough nut to crack for its three conservative originalists since at its inception article 3 was clearly used to bar all former Confederate officers from holding federal office without the necessity of a trial and conviction.