Poll: Who has enforcement authority of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution?

[Rawley]

Well there was this.

U.S. House Jan. 6 panel report finds Trump incited insurrection, demands accountability • Kansas Reflector

The U.S. House Jan. 6 committee late Thursday published its findings in a report that harshly criticized former President Trump.

kansasreflector.com

LOL Good one,

 

[Marener]

It’s a silly idea that only Congress can enforce the 14th amendment.

Such an idea would have made Brown v Board of education impossible

 

[SavannahMann]

Did you read that opinion? How do you think it's applicable to the present case?

Yes I read it. There again, the Constitution doesn’t say who determines eligibility. So the Courts step in to decide. That case a fellow named Hassan was not a Natural Born Citizen. His argument was that even if he wasn’t he could be on the ballot since there is no prohibition against an ineligible candidate running for office. He also argued the courts had no right under the constitution to determine such things.

Gorsuch wrote the opinion.

 

[Rawley]

Yes I read it. There again, the Constitution doesn’t say who determines eligibility. So the Courts step in to decide. That case a fellow named Hassan was not a Natural Born Citizen. His argument was that even if he wasn’t he could be on the ballot since there is no prohibition against an ineligible candidate running for office. He also argued the courts had no right under the constitution to determine such things.

Gorsuch wrote the opinion.

Eligibility was not determined in that case. Candidate admitted he was not eligible.

 

[SavannahMann]

Eligibility was not determined in that case. Candidate admitted he was not eligible.

So the only difference is that the courts are determining eligibility under the Constitution for a candidate. And the problem is?

 

[Concerned American]

Nobody has a right to elective office.

Nobody has claimed a right to elective office. Natural born American citizens of a certain age have a right to RUN for elective office unless proven to be ineligible. A panel of judges in CO have not proven Trump to be ineligible. You must have learned that in first year shithouse lawyer school.

 

[SavannahMann]

Nobody has claimed a right to elective office. Natural born American citizens of a certain age have a right to RUN for elective office unless proven to be ineligible. A panel of judges in CO have not proven Trump to be ineligible. You must have learned that in first year shithouse lawyer school.

Well the trial judge determined it. The Colorado Supreme Court confirmed that finding. But let’s remember why we are here.

The trial judge determined it was an insurrection. The judge also determined that Trump was a participant. However since the 14th didn’t expressly mention the office of President that they couldn’t prohibit Trump from being on the ballot.

To review. Trump won. He was on the ballot. He had what he and you say that is right and proper. But Trump wanted more. He wanted the findings overturned and it was Trump and the Republican Party in Colorado who appealed to the State Supreme Court.

We wouldn’t be having this discussion if Trump had walked away when he won. But as usual, Trump Blundered. His arrogance got in the way of smart. Not for the first time. And not for the last.

 

[Concerned American]

Well the trial judge determined it.

What trial judge. There has not been a trial of ANYONE charged with insurrection on J6. Indeed no federal agency has determined that there was an insurrection. Keep parroting democrat lies. There was NO insurrection. When you have a federal agency that legally makes that determination, let me know.

 

[SavannahMann]

What trial judge. There has not been a trial of ANYONE charged with insurrection on J6. Indeed no federal agency has determined that there was an insurrection. Keep parroting democrat lies. There was NO insurrection. When you have a federal agency that legally makes that determination, let me know.

Why do you think that it requires a Conviction?

 

[Nostra]

It’s a silly idea that only Congress can enforce the 14th amendment.

Such an idea would have made Brown v Board of education impossible

Why? Because that’s what the Amendment actually says?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

What trial judge. There has not been a trial of ANYONE charged with insurrection on J6. Indeed no federal agency has determined that there was an insurrection. Keep parroting democrat lies. There was NO insurrection. When you have a federal agency that legally makes that determination, let me know.

A civil trial, dope.
Just as Trump was found liable for sexually assaulting and defaming Miss Carroll.
Just as Trump and his business was found liable for fraud.
Just as Trump was found to be liable for fraud with the Trump foundation.
Just as Trump was found to be liable for fraud with Trump university.

“Found” simply means to have been adjudicated as such through a formal court proceeding.

Just as Trump was found to have engaged in insurrection.

You can hide from those facts but that won’t hinder the reality of them.

 

[Concerned American]

Why do you think that it requires a Conviction?

Why do you think it requires a conviction to incarcerate someone for murder? A penalty is being assessed by a gov't, it requires due process in this country. Use your head. Insurrection is a crime. That crime has not been definitively determined on the federal level----they were the agency that was supposedly harmed and they haven't even determined that an insurrection happened.

 

[Concerned American]

A civil trial, dope.
Just as Trump was found liable for sexually assaulting and defaming Miss Carroll.
Just as Trump and his business was found liable for fraud.
Just as Trump was found to be liable for fraud with the Trump foundation.
Just as Trump was found to be liable for fraud with Trump university.

“Found” simply means to have been adjudicated as such through a formal court proceeding.

Just as Trump was found to have engaged in insurrection.

You can hide from those facts but that won’t hinder the reality of them.

All will be overturned on appeal.

 

[SavannahMann]

Why do you think it requires a conviction to incarcerate someone for murder? A penalty is being assessed by a gov't, it requires due process in this country. Use your head. Insurrection is a crime. That crime has not been definitively determined on the federal level----they were the agency that was supposedly harmed and they haven't even determined that an insurrection happened.

You are comparing Apples and Horse Apples. Unlike you, and Trump, and the rest of the Fanboys. Our Ancestors didn’t view Public Office as a Right. They viewed it as an Honor, a Privilege to Serve.

What they were saying is if you Dishonored yourself you didn’t get to serve again. You would not enjoy the Privilege of further service. Which is why they said it took a 2/3 majority of Congress to remove the disability. In no other matter does Congress have the power to set aside something.

If it was a Conviction, Congress couldn’t set it aside by a 2/3 Majority could they? Congress doesn’t forgive Bank Robbers or Murderers do they?

You guys have to start questioning the Propaganda you consume in such quantity.

 

[Concerned American]

Our Ancestors didn’t view Public Office as a Right.

If you'll keep up, I agree public office is not a right. It is a privilege bestowed by the electorate. However the ability to RUN for public office is a right. CO and ME have overstepped their bounds and will be set in their place is due course.

What they were saying is if you Dishonored yourself you didn’t get to serve again.

Sorry, but 4 judges in CO don't have the authority to decide if a person has dishonored themselves on a national level. Try again.

Which is why they said it took a 2/3 majority of Congress to remove the disability. In no other matter does Congress have the power to set aside something.

That is also why the 14th gives congress the enforcement powers over those decisions---not CO or ME. That determination, ie that an insurrection even occurred has not been made. No insurrection, no underlying cause for the disqualification. Next.

If it was a Conviction,

There was nothing to demand a conviction or disqualification. A spontaneous riot is not an insurrection.

 

[SavannahMann]

If you'll keep up, I agree public office is not a right. It is a privilege bestowed by the electorate. However the ability to RUN for public office is a right. CO and ME have overstepped their bounds and will be set in their place is due course.

Sorry, but 4 judges in CO don't have the authority to decide if a person has dishonored themselves on a national level. Try again.

That is also why the 14th gives congress the enforcement powers over those decisions---not CO or ME. That determination, ie that an insurrection even occurred has not been made. No insurrection, no underlying cause for the disqualification. Next.

There was nothing to demand a conviction or disqualification. A spontaneous riot is not an insurrection.

The 14th gives Congress the authority to restore the honor of the person.

Let’s remember who is prohibited under the 14th. Persons who swore an oath to support the Constitution. People who swore on their honor to support the Constitution. Then after swearing on their honor to support the Constitution they engaged in insurrection against the nation. Against the Constitution.

Those people were excluded. Dishonored. Congress could vote to restore their honor.

This was written when a man’s word was his bond. When Men would live and die by their word. When being called dishonorable, or a liar, was an insult that could well see a Duel arranged, even if illegal, to settle the matter.

Section 3 Disqualification from Holding Office​

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 doesn’t say Convicted of. It says engaged in. It doesn’t say Congress shall determine. It says that Congress can remove the disability, restore the honor of service to the individual.

The Constitution says you can’t be deprived of Life, Liberty, meaning freedom of movement, or incarceration, or property except by due process of law.

They aren’t hanging him in the public square. They aren’t throwing him in a cell and welding the door closed. They aren’t even stripping him of his money and tossing him out on the street to live as a beggar. They are saying that Trump dishonored himself, and violated his oath of office, and is ineligible because of that.

 

[Concerned American]

they engaged in insurrection against the nation.

Please link to any official determination that any insurrection occurred on J6. Details matter.

They aren’t even stripping him of his money and tossing him out on the street to live as a beggar.

No, they are disenfranchising half of the population of those states without due process. An insurrection never occurred. You folks just seem to ignore that fact. No insurrection, no justification for any action to remove ANYONE'S rights to run or hold office. PERIOD.

 

[SavannahMann]

Please link to any official determination that any insurrection occurred on J6. Details matter.

No, they are disenfranchising half of the population of those states without due process. An insurrection never occurred. You folks just seem to ignore that fact. No insurrection, no justification for any action to remove ANYONE'S rights to run or hold office. PERIOD.

You can still vote. You aren’t being told you can’t. Hell every election Mickey Mouse gets votes. What they are saying is you can’t elect Trump. Even if he was elected, he can’t serve because he violates the terms of the 14th.

Now what would be worse? Letting Trump run and even win, and then saying he can’t swear in because he violated the 14th? So his VP would become President and Congress could choose the new VP? Or denying him early so Republicans can get a good candidate.

Oh. And the Congress said it was an insurrection.

U.S. House Jan. 6 panel report finds Trump incited insurrection, demands accountability • Kansas Reflector

The U.S. House Jan. 6 committee late Thursday published its findings in a report that harshly criticized former President Trump.

kansasreflector.com

 

[Concerned American]

What they are saying is you can’t elect Trump.

Unconstitutional. I can elect anyone I want that isn't LEGALLY disqualified. You can't disenfranchise voters because you falsely label a spontaneous riot as an insurrection with nothing to substantiate that label. But you do you. It will be settled in court. They will support FACTS not some democrat attempt to change the definition of spontaneous riot.

 

[SavannahMann]

Unconstitutional. I can elect anyone I want that isn't LEGALLY disqualified. You can't disenfranchise voters because you falsely label a spontaneous riot as an insurrection with nothing to substantiate that label. But you do you. It will be settled in court. They will support FACTS not some democrat attempt to change the definition of spontaneous riot.

Disenfranchise means you are not allowed to vote. It doesn’t mean the candidate you want is on the ballot. You are free in most states to write in a candidate who isn’t listed. I honestly don’t know if it is all states. So I say most to allow the possibility that it is prohibited in some and I am ignorant of the voting laws in every state.

If we were to apply disenfranchised that way, then I and millions of others have been disenfranchised in every election.

But as with your characterization of the actions of the January 6 mob, as a spontaneous riot, we see the real problem. You guys are redefining words to mean nothing like their original and accepted definitions.

Now I’m sure you will twist this. But I don’t know how the Supreme Court will rule. I don’t think they are going to use any of the arguments you have put forth. That crap is propaganda plain and simple.