The question is less can they but will they. In which case, Betteridge’s Law of Headlines comes into play.
For the uninformed, Betteridge’s Law of Headlines posits that any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no.
For those who couldn’t be bothered to read the article. It doesn’t apply here, at all:
Essentially, there are two different ways to read the Court’s cryptic per curiam opinion. One is that Congress must exercise its power granted in Section 5 of the 14th Amendment to enact a statute specifically tailored to enforcing the disqualification provision in Section 3 of the amendment—and that, pursuant to the Court’s previous jurisprudence concerning the scope of this Section 5 power, this congressional legislation must be “congruent and proportional” to the substance of the Section 3 disqualification.
The other possible reading of the per curiam opinion is that this kind of congressional legislation is a prerequisite for any type of judicial or administrative enforcement of Section 3 for federal offices, but it is not a prerequisite for other ways that Congress constitutionally may enforce Section 3.
Yes my understanding is in addition to passing a law, one other possibility would be declaring his electoral votes invalid and not certifying them on the grounds he committed insurrection. But I guess we’d see what the supreme court says about that if it actually happened.
It would seem to outsiders that they’d want to disqualify trump sooner, since he’s likely (already) tearing the Republican Party apart. Seems like if the were smart (… crickets) they’d rip off the bandaid to save their party from the minority of trumpets (popular minority not necessarily Republican minority).
Electing populist morons had probably ducked them too much. As long as the rest of us actually show up and vote.
Yeah, if they had been following the constitution, he would already be disqualified. A congressional supermajority would be needed to EXEMPT him.
If I’m understanding the ruling correctly, Congress are the only ones that can. They won’t, but they can.
If it were to happen somehow, I’m sure it would go back to the Supreme Court, who would then issue a contradictory ruling that said that, “No, it’s actually up to the States to decide that,” or they’d require a Constitutional amendment or somehow they’d move the goal posts.
How were the last times enforced? Hint. It was auto enforced via constitution.
Scotus is illegitimate.
Can. Won’t.
Can and will are very different.
Can they do it? Yes they can!
But because we let open bribery into our politics, how does that profit them?
Live by capitalist greed and competiton against one another, collapse by it.
Just as long as some people had the opportunity to win and live above others.
They won’t. So it’s a moot point. This does nothing but stir up the pointlessly hopefuls.
deleted by creator
