Posted on 12/20/2023 4:06:37 PM PST by Buchal
"All of these efforts and threats are a desperate attempt to gain political advantage through patently unconstitutional actions. They are a waste of time and resources and should be dismissed as such."
(Excerpt) Read more at heritage.org ...
Sir, be care of what your statements imply. The jnly thing that relates to Democrats today is Marxism. The Confederates could hardly be accused of Marxism.
They hated and fought against the United States. So does the left. They should be thrown out. The US is worth defending to the death.
I would think the 1898 law only applies to rebels before it was passed in 1898.
It allows marriage between a northerner and a southerner. Radical back in the day
“all political disabilities...are hereby removed from all persons whomsoever, except...[~=rebel Congressmen and officers]”
https://govtrackus.s3.amazonaws.com/legislink/pdf/stat/17/STATUTE-17-Pg142.pdf
What law schools did the Colorado jurists go to?
They didn’t “miss’ it. They thought all dumb asses would miss it tho.
I think Constitutional Amendments need an Act of Congress to go into effect. Remember prohibition needed the Volstead Act. They shape the regulation and enforcement of the Amendment.
But I could be wrong.
Trump has no legitimate worries with regard to January 6th.
Flagrantly denying a man due progress as required by the Constitution is an act of rebellion against it.
On this one, it was pointed out by a Freeper earlier today, the 14th amendment specifically allowed Congress by a 2/3 vote to void section 3, which Heritage Foundation reports was done (twice).
Has to be ratified by the States.
“heretofore incurred”
1898 act
The 14th amendment insurrection clause contains a repeal provisuion which allows congress to remove the bar to election or appointment to office by a 2/3 vote of both houses. That was done. The clause is no longer part of the Constitution.
“All persons” - citizens
“any person” - equal protection
“Wait, how can a Congressionally-passed law undo or erase a constitutional amendment?! If it can be done here, then it can be done with the second amendment as well.”
“Congress may, by a vote..., remove such disability”
It can’t. Just as the 1968 Gun Control Act can’t delete the 2nd Amendment. Leftist would love that.
Because it was written into the amendment:
Section 3 Disqualification from Holding Office
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/amendment-14/section-3/
I have long called for Joe Biden to be judicially barred from US public office for his Brady Bill vote.
You really have to understand that the revolutionaries believe the revolution is over, they have won, and everything they do now is just mopping up their defeated enemies.
In this context, arguments to these four justices of the Colorado Supreme Court are like Old Bolsheviks talking to Beria or Yagoda. They didn’t understand what the drain in the floor was for.
I don’t know what to do, and, as a great American once said, I’m too old to go bushwhacking.
But I can tell you that voting is not going to displace the revolutionary cadres now ruling this country, and they are just begging for a reaction that will enable them to consolidate their power using violence once and for all.
Fair enough. It might depend on the wording of the Amendment as in this case.
On the topic itself - yeah, it sure is odd that if this section 3 was repealed (twice) that it was never brought up by the defense, nor that the Justices didn’t bother to even look up precedent. Something very odd about all this - beyond the stupid ruling CSC gave.
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.