I was researching the case law associated with Amendment 14's section 3, which you all know by heart, right?
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.
It is an article of faith that Trump engaged in insurrection on January 6th. The only case law in Congress' comprehensive analysis of the 14th Amendment section 3 is United States v. Powell, 27 F. Cas. 605, 65 N. C. 709 (1871), which answers the question of what is a rebellion?
We are of opinion, gentlemen, that the word ‘'engage” implies, and was intended to imply, a voluntary effort to assist the Insurrection or Rebellion, and to bring it to a successful termination.
Everyone in the Capitol was involved, that day, whether they were encouraging people to take an impromptu tour of the public areas of the building, like Ray Epps, whoever he is; were leading tours like that Capitol Policeman who was allegedly beaten by rioters before he was seen guiding Epps on a tour; were making sure the National Guard stood down and were playing Pinochle, as Nancy Pelosi was, or cowering under her desk, two buildings away, as Alexandra Ocasio Cortez (Alexandra of the Occasional Cogitation) claimed she was. Even the people, apparently who said, "I don't think I should go inside" were involved, as so many in solitary now could confirm, if their lawyers could communicate with them.
ReplyDeleteThis catch seems to cover it:
ReplyDeletehttps://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2023/09/off_topic_but_i_1.php