Section 2 of the 14th Amendment
Congressional Representative Marjorie Green is playing cat and mouse with an Administrative Judge who took to questioning her as her memory keeps failing on certain things she has said in the past. Green was continuously reminded of past comments to the point of her being declared a “hostile witness.”
CNN — Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia was in court on Friday over past social media posts and commentary advocating violence to Pelosi, Democrats, etc. The hearing in Atlanta is to determine if barring Greene from reelection is proper and constitutional. This comes from her alleged role in the January 6 insurrection and making comments on shooting Pelosi, etc.
Marjorie could be disqualified for office resulting from the Hearing unless Congress grants her relief.
Section 2 is another part to the 14th Amendment. Below and to the left, you will see the text of Section 2. To the right, you will see an interpretation of the text.
No one fears Democrats. For good reason. – Digby’s Hullabaloo (digbysblog.net), Tom Sullivan
Pulling from the New Republic, Tom Sullivan has an interesting column at Digby’s Hullabaloo stating Congress penalizes states blocking voters. Imagine for a moment, if Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi dusted off the 14th amendment and decided to impose section 2. I am assuming this would come after a vote.
“Section 2 is a clause largely unused and forgotten for 154 years. Using it would put representation in the House in jeopardy for states blocking voting. It mandates states lose a portion of their congressional delegation if they unduly restrict the right to vote.
So, why not use Section 2 of the 14th Amendment? I have not been able to define how this occurs. I am reaching out to a higher authority who can answer my question on how this might occur.
Like Tom said in his title, “No One Fears Democrats.” So, it is doubtful this will happen. Democrats talk too much rather than do.
“Sorry, Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, but Georgia went too far in rolling back voting rights; your state lost a seat in Congress—and it’s yours.”
so if Constitution amendments are in conflict, does that mean the SCOTUS is paralyzed, because they cant make a decision? just curious, would seem to be so. if they (as they say) follow what it says (reminds of how Robie the robot in the Forbidden Planet dealt with conflicting commands)
Here is what one Constitutional attorney who has testified in Congress concerning SCOTUS justices had to say in an exchange,
“Congress clearly has the power under Section 2 of the 14th Amendment that you identify. Yet, there also is the reality that given the political realities, Congress is unlikely to act. Republican Senators surely would filibuster and block anything Democrats would try to do.
Section 3 is fascinating and it is interesting to see the attempts to invoke it, including against Greene.”
well i think the legislature (basically smaller versions of Congress) has to do any thing, i am thinking that voters can sue if say some one tried to over throw the government (say during an election…but not limited too) and were allowed run for office (which is what is limited). and then the secretary state of the state they are running in, has to make a decision, if they can run. which means it goes to court. with appeals , maybe ending up at SCOTUS.