Posted on 11/02/2023 2:11:35 PM PDT by The_Media_never_lie
As state court proceedings get under way in Colorado, Michigan and Minnesota in lawsuits aimed at barring Donald Trump from appearing as a presidential candidate on the ballot in next year’s presidential election, the judges in those cases should understand that the text, history, and application of the 14th Amendment make it clear that they have no legal authority to take any such action.
Due to Trump’s supposed actions on Jan. 6, 2021, the challengers are trying to argue that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, the disqualification clause, prevents him from being president even if he is elected, so he should be removed from the ballot by state election officials.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailysignal.com ...
That is an excellent, reasoned and backed by historical fact, SCOTUS rulings and Congressional Acts by Hans von Spakovsky.
later
So far the democrat party is showing it’s the greatest risk to the Constitution by how they go after trump.
2020 was a very bad year
Blue states enact govt travel bans over the unavailability of coed bathrooms in red states
Red states do nothing over historical political persecution.
I won’t be visiting these places anymore.
“That is an excellent, reasoned ...”
Yes, but the author, as a professional writer, made a serious mistake. It is not unconstitutional for someone to TRY to bar Trump from ...
Also, “lawfare” is one of those new terms, like “thought leader”, that are weeds in our current language usage.
Indeed.
They let a guy with no valid birth certificate run but they want to bar someone who said things they don’t like on Twitter.
We have to stop this travesty.
Each of the 50 states will have a lawsuit to ban Trump.
Instead of concentrating campaign time and funds on running for President, his staff will have to fight each layer of court with “another court to rule in 60-90 days” and then with countersuits. All costly and time consuming.
The Democrats and Socialists have to be brought to justice.
Since when are leftist ideologues constrained by legal authority?
I have one quibble with the author:
Section 3 No Longer Extant?What the author fails to consider is that the Amendment still exists. It has not been amended nor repealed.Third, there is an argument that can be made—and which was already adopted by one federal court—that Section 3 doesn’t even exist anymore as a constitutional matter...
Congress voted to remove the disqualification twice. The Amnesty Act of 1872 stated that the “political disabilities” imposed by Section 3 “are hereby removed from all persons whomsoever” except for members of the 36th and 37th Congresses and certain other military and foreign officials.
Note that there is no time limit in this language.
Congress even got rid of these remaining exceptions in the Amnesty Act of 1898, which stated that “the disability imposed by section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States heretofore incurred is hereby removed.”
There was no language preserving any of the disqualifications for future cases.
No Congress can bind a future Congress.
Just because past Congresses passed laws removing the disqualifications from the 14th amendment doesn't mean that future Congresses can't restore those disqualifications in the face of new existential threats to the nation.
Regarding January 6, Congress cannot pass ex post facto laws. If they did pass a law restoring the 14th Amendment Section 3 disqualifications, it cannot apply to January 6th as that is long in the past.
-PJ
The 14th Amendment was not, in fact, designed to keep Trump off the ballot. It was designed to keep Confederate States of America officials off the ballot.
The Confederacy was an insurrection, and was declared so by Congress.
January 6th was demagogued by some to be an “insurrection “, but because some schmucks say it was doesn’t make it so. All based on one political party’s desire to triumph over the other?
Where was the vote? Were was the arguments and speeches made both pro and con? Some TV news desk, LOL?! Nanzi Pelosi’s podium? Lizard Cheney’s microphone? Adam Kinzerger’s tear glands? GMAFB!
Verdict: not a legal toe, let alone a leg, to stand on.
Why can’t we get Biden kicked off the ballot. He took money from our enemies.
It’s ELECTION INTERFERENCE, isn’t it? I mean, in 2019, even investigating Biden was!
If anyone wants to watch from the Colorado Court livestream, here is the link. https://live.coloradojudicial.gov/?streamId=35b1db1b-2ccc-47e8-9f59-33cd656391f9
Important: Choose DENVER COURTROOM 209 from the All Live Streams drop down list.
C-SPAN’s coverage has horrible audio. I looked for a live discussion thread here over the last few days, but I don’t see one. People are not allowed to rebroadcast the hearing without court permission. Congressman Buck’s testimony was good today! Many other witnesses have provided balance and contrast to the story about what happened on January 6.
Let me add that I typically keep a tab open with the C-SPAN coverage on mute, so I can watch some video exhibits, as not all the screens are covered on the Colorado site. Hope that makes sense!
If someone "try's" to rob a bank w/o a weapon, but doesn't succeed, that's a criminal act.
If someone "try's" to murder someone with their bare hands, but isn't successful, that's a criminal act.
The president of Uzbekistan can "Try" to run for President of the United States even though he could never legally be POTUS.
What the courts are doing, by letting these clearly frivolous lawsuits proceed is in fact malfeasance in office. It's an official abuse of power.
To put another way, these courts are acting unlawfully and in an extraconstitutional manor.
As a barred attorney I am profoundly embarrassed to see how many lawyers have become Lavrentiy Beria clones.
An excellent point, and more to this article, exactly what the intent of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment was about. Which of course, is no longer an issue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.