The majority of Americans oppose the decisions in Colorado and Maine to disqualify former President Donald Trump from the 2024 ballot. Other polls put the balance slightly in favor, but all polls show a deeply divided country on this effort. The Maine decision will now be reviewed by the Maine state courts, but the Colorado decision is scheduled for oral argument in a matter of weeks. A reversal of the Colorado decision is now supported by 27 states, which filed with the Supreme Court to oppose the underlying theory under the Fourteenth Amendment. It is relatively rare to see states opposing the expansion of their own authority vis-a-vis Congress. The brief reinforces the view of states like Colorado as outliers in the country in embracing this anti-democratic theory.
The attorneys general of Indiana, West Virginia and 25 other states, warn the court that this novel theory will produce “chaos” in the country.
“The Colorado Supreme Court has cast itself into a ‘political thicket,’ Evenwel v. Abbott, 578 U.S. 54, 58, (2016), and it is now up to this Court to pull it out. ‘Confidence in the integrity of our electoral processes is essential to the functioning of our participatory democracy.’ Purcell v. Gonzalez, 549 U.S. 1, 4 (2006) (per curiam). If the Colorado decision stands, that critical confidence will be harmed. Many Americans will become convinced that a few partisan actors have contrived to take a political decision out of ordinary voters’ hands.”
Advocates are pushing this dangerous theory at a time of deepening divisions in our country. As I have previously said, the four Colorado justices are recklessly throwing matches at a powder keg. That is why I am hopeful that at least one of the liberal justices will follow the lead of the three democratically appointed Colorado justices, who dissent from this anti-democratic decision.
Here is the filing: Trump Ballot Amicus
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
There is your answer as to who officers are.
Waters, a very underrated point, but an important point. Good comment.
I thought it might counter the “uh da dup, da dup, if you have an office, that makes you an officer” stupidity.
BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE STATES OF
INDIANA, WEST VIRGINIA, 25 OTHER
STATES, AND THE ARIZONA LEGISLATURE
IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER
Ibid. Page 2
“… No State is an electoral “island” because
“the impact of the votes cast in each State is affected
by the votes cast”—or, in this case, not cast—“in other
States.” Id. at 795. The Amici States have a strong
interest in protecting their electorates from actions
that dilute their citizens’ choices. …”
– Now that I can Live with- Kudos for the Post Jonathan
There is legal principle set forth by the Supreme court that a law is unconstitutionally vague if persons of common intelligence cannot be required to guess at its meaning. The basis for that principle is that it would violate the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of due process to punish someone without ample warning that an action violates a statute. I am unaware of any application of that principle to the Constitution itself (here, the Fourteenth Amendment), but I don’t see a good reason not to do so. In my own mind, the actions of many (but far from all) at the Capital on January 6 do not constitute an insurrection. In any event, the fact that there is clearly widespread disagreement as to whether January 6 was an insurrection or a protest that got out of hand means it would be unfair and a breach of due process to punish Trump for his role in the events of that day.
That applies to criminal punishment, but I’m not sure it applies to a disqualification from office, which is civil, not criminal. However, I do believe the right to practice any lawful occupation is a protected liberty interest, which would suggest so-called procedural due process is required before the government can deprive a person of it.
There is legal principle set forth by the Supreme court that a law is unconstitutionally vague if those of common intelligence cannot be required to guess at its meaning. The basis for that primicple is that it would violate the Fifth amendment’s guarantee of due process
Secretary of Defense Austin disappeared. Even the WH didn’t know he was in hospital in intensive care.
Lots of speculation as to what ‘elective’ procedure he underwent.
I am going to make a wild guess.
He wants to take Gay’s place in Harvard and collect the obscenely high salary she received.
But he needs to check more of the important boxes to qualify.
Hence, a sex change procedure so he can check Black and Female and Obese and Lesbian. May have a foot removed too so he can check Disabled and also convert to Islam so he can check Muslim.
Should get the job with those credentials.
No scholarship or experience required.
Can’t wait to see him in his new outfit and cute shoes.
If they were insurrectionists wouldn’t they be charged as such?
Folks you ain’t seen nothing yet, wait till those mail in ballot’s, ballot harvester’s, bathroom leaks and weeks long ballot counting begin.
Just the tip of the iceberg.
Does anyone else look at this and consider the persecution the Patriotic J6 rioters are being subjected to versus what BLM or Antifa are? A more glaring example of this disgraceful disparity is the Obama launch pad himself, William Charles Ayer’s. Read a little history on that terrorist and you will truly understand what insurrection is.
People who rioted during the BLM protests were also prosecuted. But most aren’t federal prosecutions because the protesters mostly weren’t on federal property, unlike the J6 insurrectionists.
“Portland protesters set fires, damage federal courthouse; officers respond with tear gas, impact munitions”
Federal officers on Thursday repeatedly drove demonstrators away from the Mark O. Hatfield U.S. Courthouse in downtown Portland in response to fires and damage to the building just hours after a security fence was removed. Dozens of demonstrators assembled near the courthouse Thursday night, and some of them broke glass at the federal building and lit fires, according to reports from the scene. A large contingent of federal officers responded by deploying impact munitions, tear gas, flash-bang grenades and smoke bombs, according to livestream videos from independent journalists and others documenting the demonstration. Officers drove protesters away from the courthouse in at least three distinct pushes. At least one person was detained…
– The Oregonian
Over 300 federal prosecutions for the insurrectionists in the summer of love. get your facts straight
First, that statement is Leftist talking point B.S.. Second, even if it were true, there were thousands of infractions (arson, looting, assaults, murders, etc.) Why a mere 300 arrests, resulting in even fewer federal prosecutions (think corrupt DOJ/FBI here!). To my knowledge, none of the Blue rioters—unlike the Jan 6 protestors— are languishing in a filthy, primitive D.C. jail? Answer: Because filth like ‘Knee Pads’ Harris, Holly-weirdos, and other Left wing criminals bailed them out! Get YOUR facts straight, Fredo.
Virtually none were prosecuted by Federsl or state authorities.
A better site for keeping track of the various filings in this case, including briefs from amici:
https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/trump-v-anderson/
As I mentioned the other day, here is the docket for the Supreme Court case:
https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/trump-v-anderson/
The other day I read both of the amicus briefs filed on January 5th, and of the two, my recommendation is the brief filed by the RNC, which authoritatively summarizes the grotesque inadequacies of the Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-719/295012/20240105122650005_23-719%20Section%203%20Cert%20Stage%20Amici%20Brief.pdf
In addition to the Colorado and Maine cases, there are several others where the most rabid partisan residents one can imagine are testing the waters, using courts to force their personal beliefs about democracy or elections on the rest of us. One in Wyoming (knocked down) and one in Wisconsin. The Wisconsin complainant is a fellow everyone in the northern part of the state probably knows well — independently wealthy irritating gadfly.
Hubris is hardly strong enough word.
Jonathan: In other news DJT has shown his true colors. He warned that if his SC appointees don’t rule in his favor in the Colorado disbarment case there will be hell to pay: “I just hope we get fair treatment. Because if we don’t our country’s in bib, big trouble”. DJT is worried about the outcome of the Colorado case so he is trying to put political pressure on his appointees to rule in his favor.
So is one of his lawyers, Alina Habba. She is stepping up pressure on Brett Kavanaugh. She told Fox News: “I think it should be a slam dunk in the Supreme Court [Sorry, Alina, there has never been a “slam dunk” case before the SC]…You know, people like Kavanaugh, who the president fought for, who the president went through how to get in place, he’ll step up”. By “step up” Habba means Kavanaugh owes DJT big time and should rule in his favor regardless of the facts and the law. Jamie Raskin put his finger on what is going on here: “Well, this is the way that New York mobsters think about judges. Yeah, we own that one…That’s guy’s in our pocket”.
We can only hope Kavanaugh and the other conservatives on the SC are not “in the pocket” of DJT and Alina Habba and won’t be swayed by the unwarranted political pressure campaign by DJT and his supporters.
Let’s see. Democrat Senator Schumer verbally attacks the SCOTUS justices, and that’s okay. President Trump has never threatened SCOTUS. SCOTUS will overturn Colorado SC 9-0, and Maine also, if it gets that far. Even Biden’s corrupt DOJ have not charged President Trump, or anyone, with insurrection or sedition. As it stands, Colorado SC has violated President Trump’s rights under the 1st, 5th and 14th Amendments (at the minimum).
The FBI investgated and found that there was NO INSURRECTION. Case closed
The FBI didn’t find that.
Yes they did
No, they didn’t. Which is why the OP can’t quote them saying anything of the sort.
By not charging Trump they are saying there was no insurrection. No prosecutor comes out and says what crimes weren’t committed, they only show their hand by charging.
“No prosecutor comes out and says what crimes weren’t committed”
Sure they do. They do it in hearings when asked, and they do it in reports like the Mueller Report.
As for charging, they’ve already convicted multiple people of seditious conspiracy, which intersects with insurrection, and they likely chose to charge 18 U.S. Code § 2384 rather than 2383 because 2384 allows for a much longer sentence.
It does not intersect with insurrection. Where do you get that? Just makin’ crap up. Is this Svelaz?
BS. Here’s an example of the FBI describing the events on J6 as an insurrection:
“I’m grateful for the opportunity to provide an update on our progress in the investigation of the January 6 breach and insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.”
https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field-offices/washingtondc/news/press-releases/fbi-assistant-director-in-charge-steven-m-dantuonos-remarks-on-press-call-regarding-violence-at-us-capitol-012621
We owe it to the American people to find out how and why it did.
Except they don’t care why.
Four members of the Oath Keepers were convicted & sentenced of seditious conspiracy for plotting to oppose by force the lawful transfer of presidential power from Trump to Biden.
Trump publicly attacked the Supreme Court, calling them”totally incompetent & weak” after they ruled the lawsuit filed by Texas & 16 Republican led states lacked standing to invalidate millions of ballots in 4 states Biden won–Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania & Wisconsin.
Georgia’s Secretary of State, Brad Raffensperger, & other election officials received numerous death threats after Trump & Georgia Senators Kelly Loeffler & David Perdue condemned them for certifying 2020 election results. In November, a Texas man was convicted of threatening to kill Georgia election officials who certified Biden’s victory in Georgia.
Sadly, members of both parties have received death threats over the past few years.
won HAHAHAHAHAHHAHA
https://cdn.nucleusfiles.com/e0/e04e630c-63ff-4bdb-9652-e0be3598b5d4/summary20of20election20fraud20in20the20swing20states.pdf
stole, YES
Georgia was called by 11,779 votes.
Fulton County did not count the same ballots during the original count and the
machine recount. There are 19,541 distinct ballots that appear in one machine
count but not the other.
• Thousands of fraudulent “presidential only” ballots were injected into the second
machine count, with huge margins favoring Joe Biden. Ballots that are blank
except for the presidential contest were counted in batches together, with the
pattern appearing in at least eight counties, including Fulton. This means Georgia
did not have the votes to justify its original Election “results.
Election Oversight Group, LLC, ‘Investigation of the Fulton County 2020 General Election Irregularities4
and Failures of Three Counts’, 2023
See Chapter 1, ‘Report on Widespread Fraud in the Georgia 2020 Presidential Election
Insurrection is the completely ineligible Barack Hussein “Barry ‘I-Have-A-Statue-In-Jakarta’ Soetoro” Obama, son of a foreign citizen, radical activist jailed by the British for six months, formally announcing to his parasitic and criminal invading forces,
“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”
Transforming the country by voting.
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-columbia-missouri-0
Yeah. They were voting on January 1, 1863, when they may not have been admitted into the United States to become citizens, per the Naturalization Act of 1802 which was in full force and effect, and requiring immediate compassionate repatriation, it being a counterintuitive and unproductive idea to place an adverse (i.e. for obvious reasons), foreign, 4 million-man, standing army on U.S. soil.
DJT has no reason to fear the decision of the S Ct. This is not a close case. The only question is whether one of the Demo-appointed justices will support the legal position of Colorado and thus make herself a laughing stock for the future. Trolls operating under aliases have no reputational concerns. The same is not true of S Ct justices.
You have no idea what they’ll rule. I don’t either. The difference is: I don’t pretend to know, whereas you do.
There will be chaos if the Court does not overrule Colorado. The more interesting question is which of the many available grounds will gather the most votes. As I have said before, I believe they will settle on the view that enabling Federal legislation is required before courts or state officials may act.
The singular American failure is the judicial branch, with emphasis on the negligent, derelict, and absent Supreme Court.
Start here: Secession was not prohibited and was fully constitutional, all the way back to 1860 – all acts of Lincoln et al. were and remain unconstitutional while the Supreme Court sat by and did nothing to support the Constitution.
Where the heck is the power of Judicial Review? Chief Justice Roger B. Taney acted legally, appropriately, and spontaneously to issue his one and only decision which proved that Lincoln acted unconstitutionally, both willfully and deliberately, which made Lincoln a criminal of high office.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“The clause in the Constitution which authorizes the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is in the ninth section of the first article. This article is devoted to the Legislative Department of the United States, and has not the slightest reference to the Executive Department.”
“I can see no ground whatever for supposing that the President in any emergency or in any state of things can authorize the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, or arrest a citizen except in aid of the judicial power.”
“I have exercised all the power which the Constitution and laws confer on me, but that power has been resisted by a force too strong for me to overcome.”
– Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, May 28, 1861
________________________________________________
The effect of Lincoln was the progressive movement which led America in the incremental implementation of the principles of communism – the very communism that holds dominion today.
No freedom of speech. Infringed rights to keep and bear arms. Central planning, control of the means of production (i.e. unconstitutional regulation), redistribution of wealth, social engineering. The FBI and security agencies manipulating elections and corrupting the vote. States violating their own constitutions on elections laws. Mandatory EVs and Chinese solar panels. Wage and price controls. Forced unconstitutional welfare financial assistance, forced DEI, forced busing, forced affirmative action, forced quotas, forced discriminatory “non-discrimination” laws, forced unfair “fair housing” laws, forced employment and forced neighborhood “integration” but not on sports teams. Anti-American immigration laws that deliver America on a silver platter to leeches, parasites, and dependents from foreign countries which they destroyed.
When does the Supreme Court strike down dictatorship – the “dictatorship of the hired help” that is ruling and “fundamentally transforming the United States of America?”
When is the government severely limited and restricted, which is the essential purpose of the Constitution?
When does America get its Constitution back and when do Americans get their freedom back?
The kicker: Unpayable debt? $34 Trillion in debt. $250 Trillion in unfunded liabilities. $1 Trillion per year in interest.
President Jefferson said the greatest threat to our republic was an unelected federal judiciary.
The criminals of high office on the Supreme Court must be impeached and convicted.
I assume you are referencing the four Colorado Supreme Court Justices that violated President Trump’s US Constitutional rights.
Both federal and state elected officials must impeach and convict for the constant flagrant constitutional violations of the anti-American communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs, AINOs).
It is their duty to impeach and convict for infractions against the clear meaning and intent of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Both federal and state impeachment processes are the licit tools of corrective action which correct America back to the original Constitution and Bill of Rights.
The “manifest tenor” of both federal and state constitutions must be supported.
The communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs, AINOs) do not support those constitutions – they support the principles of communism which hold dominion in America today.
Get in the “Way Back Machine” and begin at the beginning:
Lincoln ended American freedom after a mere 71 years.
Lincoln’s denial of not prohibited and fully constitutional secession was unconstitutional.
Every subsequent act of Lincoln and his successors was and remains illicit, illegal, invalid, illegitimate, and unconstitutional to this day, including, but not limited to Karl Marx’s “Reconstruction Amendments.” *
America must be corrected back to the original Constitution and Bill of Rights.
____________________________________________________________________________________
*
“They consider…that it fell to…Abraham Lincoln…to lead his country through…the RECONSTRUCTION of a social world.”
– Karl Marx Letter to Abraham Lincoln, 1865 https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/iwma/documents/1864/lincoln-letter.htm
“…courts…must…declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void.”
“…men…do…what their powers do not authorize, [and] what they forbid.”
“[A] limited Constitution … can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void. Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing … To deny this would be to affirm … that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.”
– Alexander Hamilton
George is among the many failures of our educational system.
Very clever; you are a consummate wordsmith.
When fact, truth, and law fail, default to ad hominem.
Congratulations, comrade, and, oh, did I say, thank you so much for your unending patronage; thank you again, for reading again, and again, and again…
You are my best, most faithful patron, and I really do appreciate that.
Biden has let millions of illegals invade this country. That is treason.
Article 3, Section 3
“…adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”
The immigration law of the communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs, AINOs) engages in “…adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”
Jonathan: It is “rare” that states would now oppose their own God-given “state’s rights” and encourage the SC to overturn the Colorado SC decision. But that is exactly what Republican led states are doing. It’s strange that these same states welcomed the Dobbs decision that left to the states decisions on abortion but suddenly claim Colorado doesn’t have the right to enforce its own election laws. A bizarre position to take after some of these same states fought tooth and nail to keep their gerrymandered voting laws and celebrated when the SC endorsed them. Consistency is not the hallmark of “state’s rights” for these 27 states!
That said, there are other important developments in the news this week. Yesterday DJT filed to be on the ballot in Illinois. But he refused to sign the loyalty pledge, the same one he signed in 2016 and 2020. The oath requires a candidate to attest that they “do not directly or indirectly teach or advocate the overthrow of the government of the United States or of this state or any unlawful change in the form of government thereof by force or any unlawful means”.
Both Biden and DeSantis signed the oath this year. Why didn’t DJT sign? Because three years ago yesterday he broke that oath and doesn’t want to be accused of doing the same thing this year if he loses!
I am sure his attorneys told him not to sign due to ongoing litigation as Democrats will do and use anything to oppose President Trump.
Dennis – The misnomer “state’s rights” should apply in areas of mainly local concern, e.g. criminal law relating to individuals. It is nonsensical to apply the concept to areas of mainly federal concern, e.g. foreign policy. The election of a President of the United States is obviously especially a matter of federal concern.
Edwardmahl: What in the world are you talking about? “State’s rights” was the clarion call of the Confederacy, in the post- Civil War era, the fights against the Civil Rights movement and in the gerrymandering cases. It was NEVER just a “local concern”. It’s no coincidence that 27 states, many in the Old South, who are asking the SC to overturn the Colorado SC decision. That’s a lot of states to be only a “local concern”. You can try to twist the facts but you can’t change the truth!
Dennis
How many sharecroppers served in the Civil War?
A rough number will suffice.
You have zero integrity and even less credibility.
How many truths have you tried to change dennis?
Dennis
How many sharecroppers served in the Civil War?
A rough number will suffice.
You have zero integrity and even less credibility.
Lawrence Tribe.
Maybe call the source.
Maybe do something about it.
Great to see all these state officials opposing the election interference being done by this obscure Maine Secretary of State. Trump has millions of supporters in the US, – but not the Maine Secretary of State – she doesn’t like him – so Trump is taken off the ballot. Amazingly, this lady believes she has the “power” to decide who will be our next President. That’s a lot of chutzpah. Did this lady go to Harvard? It’s looking more like we need to make election interference a crime now in America. I’m a libertarian type – I don’t normally believe in criminalizing political behavior -but the Democrats have gone into the abyss , many believe in this mantra “By any means necessary”. I myself believe this raid of Trump’s home – engineered by his top political rival Joe Biden, was a crime. I never saw anything like that in my life, ( I am 70) an ex-President’s home being raided under such a flimsy premise by his top political rival. It was police state stuff, something the Nazi’s did in the 30’s. I recall reading about Hitler’s rise to power in Germany; he got rid of his political enemies early on by framing them for crimes (later he would murder them). Show trials were staged, the Nazi’s would bring in a poltical rival of Hitlers – charged with a fake crime – to the trial, in clothes that were three sizes too big for the defendant (to make him look bad). An unfair trial would be held, with a conviction buttressed with fake evidence. Hitler’s political enemy goes to prison. It hasn’t got this bad yet with the Democrats, but give them time. The prosecutions of Trump, from what I can see, are all show trials. We resolve our political differences in America with free and fair elections, not with show trials, and made up criminal prosecutions. Nor do obscure Secretary’s of States decide our elections. The Democrats don’t seem to understand this – they did in the past – but not today.I have never see worse leadership than the Democrats have today.
“opposing the election interference being done by this obscure Maine Secretary of State”
This case, Trump v. Anderson, does not involve the Maine Secretary of State.
Trump is appealing the Maine SoS’s determination in Maine court, not before SCOTUS.
I would imagine that if the SCOTUS does not put an abrupt end to this nonsense we will shortly lose whatever semblance of civilized government that we still retain and devolve into anarchy until a tyrant emerges to quell the disorder. Enough, already, of the toddler tantrums of the TDS crowd and provide the entire lot of them one-way tickets to the socialist tyranny regime of their choice just to clear out the flotsam from within our society.
The problem in this country right now is that there are a few words that make otherwise reasonable people lose their minds: Trump, Covid, insurrection are a few of them. Take the words Trump and insurrection out of the Colorado case and what you have is the Supreme Court disqualifying a candidate by proclaiming him guilty of a crime of which he has not even been accused, let alone convicted, in a court of law. By that reasoning, anybody can be taken off the ballot at any time for any reason, and the faker the reason is, the easier it is to take the candidate off the ballot. This is no longer limited to Trump. I have a feeling SCOTUS is going to try to punt because of their own hatred for Trump and I really hope they don’t.
Democrat politicians in Colorado and Maine have now engaged in an insurrection. They are not federal officials so they can’t be removed from office under the 14th Amendment. But they can and should be charged under 18 USC 2383. If Scotus doesn’t reverse on the merits, I predict a civil war. These state politicians’ actions are as much a rebellion as the secession from the Union by various southern states in the 1800s.
14 A.3 expressly applies to the States as well.
LAW APPLIES YOU SAY?
Secession was not delegated to the United States, nor prohibited to the States, and, therefore, reserved to the States, or to the people, in 1860.
The Naturalization Act of 1802 was in full force and effect on January 1, 1863.
The executive branch had no constitutional basis or authority to issue a “proclamation.”
Martial law and suspension of habeas corpus could not be imposed by the executive branch.
Abortion was illicitly, anti-constitutionally, and unconstitutionally declared a federal law and constitutional right in 1973.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
The Supreme Court of 2022 acted 50 years retroactively, corrected, and struck down the illicit abortion of the corrupt Supreme Court of 1973.
The Supreme Court of 2024 must now act 150 years retroactively to correct and strike down all effects and consequences of the corrupt Abraham Lincoln and successors.
There was nothing retroactive in the Dobbs decision — it only impacted abortions and State laws from the date of the decision. To overrule Texas v White (1869) that said there was no right to secede and make it retroactive as you wish, would mean a return of the Confederacy and many other insane consequences.
George wants insane consequences. He is immune to factual reasoning.
Glorious, comrade!
Who could refute such an irrefutable refutation?
What a —-ing idiot!
Indeed you are.
Again, vacuous ad hominem, comrade.
It is certainly to be expected as refutation is impossible.
I would argue that, if the “United States” eliminated the Electoral College constitutional requirements, any state could than decide to leave the republic (secede) due to said change.
Don’t be silly. The only way that the EC can be eliminated is via constitutional amendment, which would require ratification by at least 3/4 of the states.
“Crazy Abe” rammed through three amendments, the first within months of war’s end, when typically it is nigh on impossible to ratify even one in a decade.
What’s that tell you about the global unconstitutionality of every last thing “Crazy Abe” did?
“Crazy Abe,” in the name of Karl Marx, fundamentally transformed the U.S. with a gun to America’s head.
“… or under any state …”
Thanks, I had missed that.
As does 14 Sec 1 (equal protection and due process) and 14 Sec 5 (only Congress has the authority). 14 Sec 3 does not apply as no one has been charged with or convicted of insurrection or rebellion. Also, the President and Vice President are not covered by Sec 3 as they are not “officers”.
Now that the communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs, AINOs) have destroyed the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and America, the communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs, AINOs) demand that Americans obey the law.
Why didn’t America obey the Constitution in 1860?
Why hasn’t America obeyed the Constitution since 1860?
14 A.3 expressly applies to the States as well.
It did until 18 USC 2383
Now, Mr lawyer, would you care to speculate as to why 18 USC 2384, Seditious Conspiracy, while carrying twice the jail time, doesn’t bar someone from public office as does 18 USC 2384?
Last word should be 18 USC 2383
Why dont you explain why 18 USC 2384 does not bar someone from holding public office?
that hatred for Trump seems odd since 3 of them would not even be on that bench if it weren’t for Trump and his supporters.
Fascist Democrats don’t care
and the Republicans WILL do nothing beyond a strongly worded letter, a hearing…and the give more trillions to criminal Democrats
time to cut 50% of federal spending, end all federal aid to cities, colleges, states and non-profits where anyone gets $100k+