Posted on 09/06/2023 11:16:44 AM PDT by Golden Eagle
Unfortunately.
I agree with you generally that the statutes regarding insurrection came out of the Civil War era. With that said, I wouldn't limit the thinking to just Civil War acts.
However, I would point you to 50 U.S. Code Title 50—WAR AND NATIONAL DEFENSE, specifically 50 U.S. Code CHAPTER 13—INSURRECTION.
All of the individual sections refer to "state[s] in insurrection," not individual citizens. Individuals would not have the wherewithal to undertake an actual insurrection, but the organized people of individual states could (and have).
This is understandable given that the 14th amendment was in response to the Civil War and the seceding states (states in insurrection), not individuals. Section 3 of the 14th amendment was written with the idea of preventing the office holders of future seceding states from holding offices in the United States.
Therefore, "insurrection" in the 14th amendment was meant to apply to the several states, not to individual citizens. A state must be in open rebellion before the citizens of that state can be held for insurrection.
If Congress tried to pass a new law to define insurrection as inciteful speech in front of a large crowd near the Capitol in order to use it as the basis for charging President Trump, it would be an ex post facto law if applied to Trump. A law like that would have to already be on the books to apply to the January 6 speech. A new law would only apply to future speech.
I doubt that 18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection, by itself, would be enough to indict an individual on without there being a larger entity like a state involved.
-PJ
No standing.
Hey. I’m not reading this post. I really did wonder that and it’s just too bad you can’t take the fact someone would think something like this. I wonder about it.
It reads like an amendment of attainder.
This will go to the Supreme Court. If these states are using the US Constitution to claim a violation of this document, then a State court has no jurisdiction over the US Constitution, only the Federal Courts and ultimately SCOTUS. This claim will be settled by SCOTUS.
Totally agree. And the term “STATES in insurrection” was clearly a wartime issue. There were no “states” in insurrection at all during the Patriot Day (J6) activities.
Believe me, if they could have kept MTG off the ballot with this, they would have.
No idea, but it’s irrelevant as the 14th AMENDMENT clearly refers to the Civil War, and can’t by itself have its intent changed by post-statute law, or they would have just gone back and passed a law that banned firearms.
That amendment was geared towards those who fought for the confederacy
Trump did nothing close
As long as Trump has filled the correct forms for that state, isn’t it valid to write in his name on the ballot?
Donald John Trump
Trump the ONLY president who did not start stupid foreign wars or continued asinine foreign wars with borrowed money
Trump the only president who actually built a substantial wall on southern border in spite of resistance from deep state.
Trump gave us record low unemployment.
Trump gave us record low gas prices (inflation adjusted).
Trump gave us record low inflation.
Trump nominated 3 good persons to SCOTUS.
Trump gave us biggest tax cut in history.
Trump stopped N Korea from launching rockets with just personal relationship with Kim. DeSantis or any others have no such personality.
Putin did not invade anybody when Trump was president.
Trump built strongest US military in history.
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.