![]() ![]() Personally, I have my own reservations about using this Section and believe the ballot box will be a more effective means of deciding this question. That said one of the authors of the paper has already changed his mind after reading comments in the Wall Street Journal based on a contrasting report, ironically the same length of his co-authored argument that came to the opposite conclusion about the self-executing nature of Section 3. Whether they knew or didn't know is immaterial to what transpired, which did not depend on their foreknowledge, unless you are implying that it was really the security agencies that instigated the events of that day. Word play: there were armed, highly organized groups involved with their own stated goal of 'taking back the government' - January 6 was neither a tourist visit nor a peaceful protest run amok or do you like the erstwhile Governor of Florida not have a TV where you could see for yourself? 3/4 can be handled together as they are irrelevant to the question of the TFG's intent or purpose. Right now it is suspicious but up for grabs. The Willard War Room, the Chief of Staff's presence there along with his personal lawyer Giuliani, his personal long-time friend Roger Stone suggests lots of dots, many of which might well be linked. Previous knowledge - this is up for grabs. While it sounds reasonable, your particular set of requirements would make it impossible to prosecute a case. Thomas School of Law, who argue that Section Three does indeed apply. ![]() But the effort to remove Trump from the ballot has received further support from a recent article by two distinguished constitutional law professors, William Baude of the University of Chicago Law School and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St. Section Three has already been used successfully to remove from office a New Mexico county commissioner named Couy Griffin, the organizer of “Cowboys for Trump,” who helped rally members of the mob that breached the Capitol on January 6. Could a constitutional provision adopted in 1868 really save American democracy in 2024? Numerous lawsuits have been filed arguing that Trump’s participation in an insurrection on Janu– either by itself or as part of a larger effort to nullify the 2020 election – disqualifies him. Its backers rely on Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment of the US Constitution, which bars from office anyone who has “engaged in insurrection or rebellion … or given aid or comfort to the enemies” of the United States. ![]() CHICAGO – A new legal effort to prevent Donald Trump from retaking the presidency next year is afoot. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |