Title of the article now reads:
Liberal groups seek to use the Constitution’s insurrection clause to block Trump from 2024 ballots
And the first paragraph:
As former President Donald Trump dominates the Republican presidential primary, some liberal groups and legal experts contend that a rarely used clause of the Constitution prevents him from being president after the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.
My bold in both cases.
This annoys me. The paper The Sweep and Force of Section Three is what really started all this, and it was written by two members of the Federalist Society. The concept is strongly supported by J. Michael Luttig, a very conservative former federal judge. Why is Associated Press painting this like it’s a course of action only supported by liberal minds?
To be fair, “liberal” was in the title when I posted the article, but I, like you, thought that was misleading, so I left it off.
Remind me, which party again calls itself “law and order”? Can’t seem to remember.
Ive heard this has been floated in various states (since Trumps actions have clearly violated their state laws when it comes to candidacy)
… I wonder how this would look if a candidate appeared on a ballot in one state and not in another?
It’s a pretty interesting scenario to imagine. What is bothersome is that I can’t see a situation where it wouldn’t lead to more right wing domestic terrorism. Which is just terrible, but almost seems inevitable next year no matter what happens really. Here is hoping we get through this with as little harm as possible.
So let me get this straight, instead of using the legal process for gerrymandering, voter suppression, banning books, loading fascists onto the supreme Court, forcing rape victims to bear the children of rapists, etc… actually use the legal system to prevent certain authoritarianism? Fuck me that’s brilliant.
