"sew" = "sow." Reap what you sow, sew what you rip. Yes, I know I'm being that guy.
If the Bible had been written by a textiles-based society instead of by an agrarian society there'd be more sewing and less sowing in their metaphors (and probably fewer sheep too) but alas.
“Some legal analysts have noted that the conservatives basically reversed their position from the 2013 Shelby v. Holder case, in which they moved the power to enforce the 14th Amendment away from the federal government and towards the states. So now the law — as I understand it — is that the 14th Amendment is operative, except for the parts that aren’t, and only Congress can enforce it, except that if they do try to enforce it, they can’t. Good stuff.”
I know you know this, but the President isn' included in the list of officers because the position is the only National official that we vote for; the others are State officials, so states have control of them.
To expand on this, the 14th Amendment was directed against the possibility that particular constituencies or officials with insurrectionist sympathies would be able to vote for or appoint an insurrectionist. It would have been entirely reasonable (and was probably a good idea) not to include a nationwide office within its scope.
But to highlight how confusing all of this is: They DID include the "any office civil or military" language, which almost every judge who has looked at this has interpreted to include the president. They could have explicitly included or excluded the president but did neither.
Good Jar Jar Binks joke but beyond that this essay should have been one paragraph long, maybe two, to gloat.
Activation of the 14th Amendment fundamentally depends on a conviction for insurrection, which was not and may never be the case.
By insurrection, I mean willfully, actively and violently working to overthrough an entire government.
By conviction, I mean in a legitimate court of law (not a panic attack by people with hyperactive imaginations).
Any Judge who sought to strike Trump from a state ballot without a conviction should be censured or disbarred, as they evidently are unfamiliar with the meaning of "innocent until proven guilty".
Looking at recent polling results, most Americans have rationally concluded we need four more years of Donald Trump's "no new wars" policies, prosperity at home, respect abroad and zero naked, grown men in the women's (and girls') locker rooms coast-to-coast, et cetera.
As a nation, we have been off course for nearly a decade (long before Trump arrived) and the Left are just pissing gasoline and searching for a match to start another season of mostly peaceful protests.
Occam's Razor suggests a second Trump term will be similar to his first one, except now we know how corrosive Hillary Clinton can be to the entire country when she conjures up a hoax, and how corrupt our government truly is and at the highest levels. The list of examples of corruption is long, and horrifying, but the highlight reel at the federal level includes; the DOJ, DHS, CIA, DOT, IRS, NSA, FBI, CDC, EPA, FDA, all this and much, much more.
It could have been a political move. It's a good strategy to keep the insurrection in the news. And each time it's described as an insurrection, rather than "riot" or "civil disorder". Probably not a good development that legal challenges are now used for political campaigning, but what can you do.
I’m no lawyer but as for being mostly “governed by custom” I think that’s a feature, not a bug, of common law systems - either full common law like UK or hybrid law systems like USA and Canada
The 14th Amendment was flawed from the beginning and should have never been ratified. One could say illegally ratified as the Southern States that seceded had to vote for ratification for those states to be re-admitted to the Union (an utterly ridiculous oxymoron, to say the least). Maybe we should consider an amendment to strike the 14th Amendment (like we did the 18th Amendment)?
"sew" = "sow." Reap what you sow, sew what you rip. Yes, I know I'm being that guy.
If the Bible had been written by a textiles-based society instead of by an agrarian society there'd be more sewing and less sowing in their metaphors (and probably fewer sheep too) but alas.
Corrected, thanks. Getting sew/sow wrong is a long-running feature of this blog.
It's your version of the "chicken dance" from Arrested Development.
“Some legal analysts have noted that the conservatives basically reversed their position from the 2013 Shelby v. Holder case, in which they moved the power to enforce the 14th Amendment away from the federal government and towards the states. So now the law — as I understand it — is that the 14th Amendment is operative, except for the parts that aren’t, and only Congress can enforce it, except that if they do try to enforce it, they can’t. Good stuff.”
It’s Calvinball for me, but not for thee?
I know you know this, but the President isn' included in the list of officers because the position is the only National official that we vote for; the others are State officials, so states have control of them.
To expand on this, the 14th Amendment was directed against the possibility that particular constituencies or officials with insurrectionist sympathies would be able to vote for or appoint an insurrectionist. It would have been entirely reasonable (and was probably a good idea) not to include a nationwide office within its scope.
But to highlight how confusing all of this is: They DID include the "any office civil or military" language, which almost every judge who has looked at this has interpreted to include the president. They could have explicitly included or excluded the president but did neither.
Oh those little rascals. I'm glad the court had the brains to decide as they did.
Good stuff. But SCOTUS seems to make about 1/3 of its decisions unanimously: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1121&context=nulr Also, if a case is incendiary enough, there's real CYA pressure to produce a unanimous decision.
“like when libertarians say that the Constitution says that a cop has to give you his gun if you ask for it”
I need a source here- I can’t wait to use this argument in the dorm room anarcho-capitalist purity contest! 🤔
Good Jar Jar Binks joke but beyond that this essay should have been one paragraph long, maybe two, to gloat.
Activation of the 14th Amendment fundamentally depends on a conviction for insurrection, which was not and may never be the case.
By insurrection, I mean willfully, actively and violently working to overthrough an entire government.
By conviction, I mean in a legitimate court of law (not a panic attack by people with hyperactive imaginations).
Any Judge who sought to strike Trump from a state ballot without a conviction should be censured or disbarred, as they evidently are unfamiliar with the meaning of "innocent until proven guilty".
Looking at recent polling results, most Americans have rationally concluded we need four more years of Donald Trump's "no new wars" policies, prosperity at home, respect abroad and zero naked, grown men in the women's (and girls') locker rooms coast-to-coast, et cetera.
As a nation, we have been off course for nearly a decade (long before Trump arrived) and the Left are just pissing gasoline and searching for a match to start another season of mostly peaceful protests.
Occam's Razor suggests a second Trump term will be similar to his first one, except now we know how corrosive Hillary Clinton can be to the entire country when she conjures up a hoax, and how corrupt our government truly is and at the highest levels. The list of examples of corruption is long, and horrifying, but the highlight reel at the federal level includes; the DOJ, DHS, CIA, DOT, IRS, NSA, FBI, CDC, EPA, FDA, all this and much, much more.
No one was MORE right than me. Love that.
Yes, you got it right. Congrats. But it was a slam dunk. What were CO, ME, and IL thinking? Ray Charles could see that this was a loser.
Yep, yet oddly, the fact that many people saw this coming doesn’t dilute my sense of self-righteous glee!
It could have been a political move. It's a good strategy to keep the insurrection in the news. And each time it's described as an insurrection, rather than "riot" or "civil disorder". Probably not a good development that legal challenges are now used for political campaigning, but what can you do.
I keep coming back to this article because the premise cracks me up so much. Really great stuff. :)
I’m no lawyer but as for being mostly “governed by custom” I think that’s a feature, not a bug, of common law systems - either full common law like UK or hybrid law systems like USA and Canada
The 14th Amendment was flawed from the beginning and should have never been ratified. One could say illegally ratified as the Southern States that seceded had to vote for ratification for those states to be re-admitted to the Union (an utterly ridiculous oxymoron, to say the least). Maybe we should consider an amendment to strike the 14th Amendment (like we did the 18th Amendment)?