Close Menu
    Conspiracy

    Rep. Jamie Raskin is saying that congress will STOP Trump from taking office even if he’s chosen by the voters by invoking the Section 3 of the 14th Amendment

    Rep. Jamie Raskin is saying that congress will STOP Trump from taking office even if he’s chosen by the voters by invoking the Section 3 of the 14th Amendment
    View 14 Comments

    14 Comments

    1. arnott on

      SS:

      [Jamie Raskin](https://x.com/charliekirk11/status/1820544999584666038) is saying that congress will STOP Trump from taking office even if he’s chosen by the voters.

      [The Supreme Court’s decision centers on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.](https://archive.ph/uxAPO#selection-517.0-521.175)
      >The provision disqualifies former government officials from holding office if they took an oath to support the Constitution but then betrayed it by engaging in an insurrection

      >All nine justices agreed that while states can enforce Section 3 against holders and seekers of state offices, they lack authority to enforce it against holders and seekers of national offices. The justices worried that otherwise, different states could reach different decisions about taking candidates off the ballot, resulting in a disruptive “patchwork” that would sever the link the framers wanted there to be between the federal government and the people of the United States as a whole.

      Jamie Raskin is saying the lazy judges with great security are not doing their jobs, and congress will do it on Jan 6, 2025.

      [Tweet link.](https://x.com/charliekirk11/status/1820544999584666038)

    2. Every-Entry2723 on

      This will never happen. There’s just no way it would go over without a second serving of civil war

    4. MiserableMulberryMan on

      Here is [Trump v Anderson](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-719_19m2.pdf), the Colorado case where the Supreme Court decided that it is Congress’s role to determine what is and is not an insurrection. Raskin is talking about using the powers conferred by that case to disqualify Trump as an insurrectionist by whatever definition Congress wants to use at that time.

      This is the biggest weakness of the SCOTUS ruling. It refused to even accept or deny Colorado’s finding that Trump committed insurrection, and simply said “responsibility for enforcing Section 3 against federal officeholders and candidates rests with Congress, and not the states.” If Harris is elected and Republicans control Congress and want to do what Raskin is threatening, it seems to me that they can define just about anything as an insurrection and disqualify the president elect.

      There would obviously be lawsuits. So many lawsuits. With the current makeup of the Supreme Court, it’s a toss-up on how they would rule on such bullshit. It would probably entirely depend on which candidate it affected.

    5. RabidJoint on

      Doesn’t matter really what this dude says, Trump isn’t winning any popularity contest any time soon

    6. ExperienceNew2647 on

      But bribes are legal, so they can do the Dems bidding and then get paid after the fact = not a bribe.

    7. Any-Video4464 on

      Trump’s a threat to democracy so the left may as well just destroy it now before he gets a chance to.

    9. 5knklshfl on

      I keep telling people to elect Trump in a landslide because he’s infiltrated with swamp monsters and it will stem the tide of right wing populism. The alternative if he’s not voted in is drastic and ugly .

    12. MagicHarmony on

      I thought the supposed January 6th “insurrection” was because of this very act this man is attempting to enact.

    13. SceneAccomplished549 on

      I’m not American so please go easy on me but umm…… what he is saying is quite illegal…..right?

      Kinda sounds like they’re trying to push each side to a fever pitch to start “something”

    Leave A Reply