Gaetz, Stefanik offer resolution declaring Trump ‘did not engage in insurrection’ (thehill.com)

submitted 9 months ago by ctkatz@lemmy.ml to c/politics@lemmy.world

9 comments fedilink hide all child comments

... in other words gaetz and company are admitting (knowingly or unwittingly) that

trump is an insurrecionist
trump is very likely to lose at the supreme court in his colorado 14th amendment appeal hearing
that the plain text reading of section 3 of the 14th amendment says congress can waive the condition (but only if 2/3 of both houses agree to waive the condition)

the funny thing is how when this passes the house, it won't be anywhere close to the 290 they need but they'll try to act as though it's binding. and they're doing this before the hearing, where the plaintiff's attorney and/or the colorado solicitor general can point out that since the house and senate have initiated resolutions declaring trump not an insurrectionist that the colorado supreme court ruling should hold since the congress has started the process of returning trump to the ballot.

and if I a non law talkin guy could see this and figure it out then so should the supreme court. especially if someone points that out to them.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] spongebue@lemmy.world 24 points 9 months ago

The 14th amendment explicitly allows Congress to cure a disqualification with a 2/3 vote in each house. The idea that it should also be implied that that same Congress decides someone is disqualied is absolutely ridiculous. In a way, I kind of want this resolution to get just enough traction to get challenged and have someone try to explain why a resolution passed (by just one house? Not sure) with a simple majority should be enough to cure a constitutional provision that needs 2/3. And whine we're at it maybe shine a light on the fact that Congress should not be the one making this determination other than the 2/3 to cure provision.

[-] dhork@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago

They're trying to do an end-run around the 2/3 provision, though. Instead of using that to un-disqualify him, they are trying to get a simple majority to state "He never did those things in the first place", and contradict the Colorado judge.

I'm pretty sure that's not how the law works, though. Congress makes law, and judges interpret it. While there's still an open issue on who gets to declare that the provisions of the amendment have self-executed, Congress can't simply declare "It never happened" and make that declaration have any force.

The only purpose of this resolution is to throw a bone to the MAGAs. Which, ironically, can be seen as inciting another insurrection. So these people might be signing their own disqualification if it leads to another MAGA tantrum on Federal buildings in DC.

[-] neptune@dmv.social 0 points 9 months ago

Yeah. 100% counterproductive and I hope they move forward with it. Then we can have Gaetz explain his form to SCOTUS

[-] grabyourmotherskeys@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

"We have always been at war with Eurasia."

this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2024

66 points (88.4% liked)

politics

19107 readers

2968 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News