JAB wrote:
The incredible 91-year-old Republican whose constitutional
challenge
to Donald Trump's eligibility to be on the Colorado ballot is now
before the Supreme Court and could make American history for saving
the Republic. Ian Bassin @ianbassin ================================================
Norma Anderson remembers sitting transfixed in front of her
television
on Jan. 6, 2021, and crying as she watched a mob of Donald Trump's supporters storm the U.S. Capitol, wondering why the then-president
had not called out the National Guard.
"I am old enough to remember the Depression, World War Two,
two other
wars, recessions, good times, bad times, and lots of presidents.
But
never have I seen what happened on January 6th," the
91-year-old
life-long Colorado Republican said. "I knew who was guilty
immediately."
Today, Anderson, the first woman to serve as majority leader in
both
houses of the Colorado legislature, leads a lawsuit that could
cause a
political explosion: Trump's disqualification from the Republican
primary ballot in the state under a 19th century constitutional
provision for engaging in insurrection.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/conservative-trump-challengers-colorado-see-threat-democracy-2024-01-12/
The
post raises an important and controversial issue regarding the
constitutional eligibility of former President Donald Trump to run for
office again in 2024. The post summarizes the main arguments of a
lawsuit filed by Norma Anderson, a former Republican leader in
Colorado, who claims that Trump�s actions on January 6, 2021, amounted
to engaging in insurrection against the United States, and thus
disqualified him from holding any public office under the Fourteenth
Amendment.
The lawsuit, which is currently pending before the U.S. Supreme Court,
has attracted national attention and sparked heated debates among
legal experts, political commentators, and the public. Some supporters
of the lawsuit argue that it is a necessary and legitimate way to hold
Trump accountable for his role in inciting the violent attack on the
Capitol, and to prevent him from undermining the democratic process
and the rule of law in the future. Some opponents of the lawsuit
contend that it is a politically motivated and unconstitutional
attempt to disenfranchise millions of voters who support Trump, and to
infringe on his right to free speech and due process.
The outcome of the lawsuit could have significant implications for the
2024 presidential election, as well as for the broader questions of presidential power, accountability, and legitimacy in the American
political system. The Supreme Court is expected to hear oral arguments
in the case in February 2024, and to issue a decision by June 2024.
Until then, the legal and political debate over Trump�s eligibility
will likely continue to divide the nation and shape the public
discourse.
The lawsuit relies on Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was
enacted after the Civil War to prevent former Confederate officials
from holding public office unless they were pardoned by Congress. The
provision states that:
�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.�
Anderson and her co-plaintiffs argue that Trump, who took an oath to
support the Constitution as president, engaged in insurrection or
rebellion against the United States by encouraging and inciting his
supporters to attack the Capitol in an attempt to overturn the results
of the 2020 presidential election. They claim that Trump�s actions
violated his oath of office, endangered the lives of members of
Congress and the vice president, and threatened the peaceful transfer
of power.
The lawsuit faces several legal hurdles, however, as the Supreme Court
has never ruled on the meaning and scope of Section 3 of the
Fourteenth Amendment. Some of the questions that the Court will have
to address include:
What constitutes �engaging in insurrection or rebellion� under Section
3?
Who has the authority to determine whether someone has violated
Section 3?
What is the standard of proof and the burden of proof for proving a
violation of Section 3?
What is the procedure and the remedy for enforcing Section 3?
Does Section 3 apply retroactively to actions that occurred before its ratification in 1868?
Does Section 3 violate the First Amendment rights of free speech and association of the person accused of violating it?
Does Section 3 violate the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment rights of
due process and equal protection of the person accused of violating
it?
The lawsuit also faces political challenges, as it could provoke a
backlash from Trump�s loyal base and further polarize the country.
Some critics of the lawsuit argue that it is a waste of time and
resources, as Trump has already been impeached twice by the House of Representatives and acquitted twice by the Senate for his role in the
Capitol riot. They also point out that Trump has not announced his
intention to run for president again in 2024, and that he could face
other legal obstacles, such as criminal investigations and civil
lawsuits, that could prevent him from doing so.
The lawsuit, however, has also received support from some prominent
figures, such as former Attorney General Eric Holder, who called it �a
very strong case� and urged the Supreme Court to take it seriously. He
said that the lawsuit could serve as a deterrent for future presidents
who might be tempted to abuse their power and undermine democracy.
The lawsuit is one of several legal actions that have been filed
against Trump and his allies in relation to the Capitol riot,
including criminal charges, civil lawsuits, and congressional
investigations. The outcome of these actions could have lasting
consequences for the legacy of Trump, the future of the Republican
Party, and the stability of the American democracy.
This is a response to the post seen at:
http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=659061396#659061396
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)