We will know soon: how the lower courts rule on this! https://apnews.com/article/trump-amendment-b****t-ban-i**********n-colorado-4641bcfff79abf1d5d79dae7c3a73fa6...

Triple G

how the lower courts rule on this!

https://apnews.com/article/trump-amendment-b****t-ban-i**********n-colorado-4641bcfff79abf1d5d79dae7c3a73fa6

Wyantry Loc: SW Colorado

Triple G wrote:

how the lower courts rule on this!

https://apnews.com/article/trump-amendment-b****t-ban-i**********n-colorado-4641bcfff79abf1d5d79dae7c3a73fa6

This might change the schedule for the Supreme Court !

Amendment 14, Section 3

“No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or e*****r of President and Vice-President, or hold

any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath,

as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or

as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged

in i**********n or r*******n against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.

But Congress may by a v**e of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

(Emphasis added)

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

Wyantry wrote:

b This might change the schedule for the Supreme ... (show quote)

Amendment 14, Section 3 does not apply to Presidents.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Triple G wrote:

how the lower courts rule on this!

https://apnews.com/article/trump-amendment-b****t-ban-i**********n-colorado-4641bcfff79abf1d5d79dae7c3a73fa6

Without a conviction it should not hold water, hell, a DA could indict Biden for bribery and therefore remove him from the b****t according to the logic of this case.

Wyantry Loc: SW Colorado

Racmanaz wrote:

Amendment 14, Section 3 does not apply to Presidents.

If somehow you cannot read the article, why not just up and say that instead of making nonsense statements like it “does not apply to Presidents” ?

— when the sections explicitly states: “No person(*) . . . or hold any office(**) . . . who, having previously taken an oath . . . to support the Constitution of the United States (***). . .”(§)

(*) INCLUDING Presidents !
(**) Cannot hold office !
(***) Trump swore the oath of office !

Learn to read.
~~~~~~~~~~

”Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits anyone who has previously taken an oath of office (Senators, Representatives, and other public officials) from holding public office if they have "engaged in i**********n or r*******n" against the United States. This means, at least theoretically, that politicians who participate in or encourage a r*******n against the government can not only be removed from office but prevented from holding state and federal offices in the future. However, how disqualification works under the 14th Amendment has never been clear.

Could the disqualification clause prevent Donald Trump from running for president in 2024?

Theoretically, yes. Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment gives Congress the power to disqualify someone who has already held a public office from holding "any office" if they participate in an "i**********n or r*******n" against the United States.

But since this mechanism has never been used against a president, there are still questions to resolve. The disqualification clause applies to current and former federal officials, state officials, and military officials. However, legal scholars are split on whether the disqualification clause applies to the presidency. It's likely the 14th Amendment will continue to come up in conversations approaching the 2024 p**********l e******n.

Is disqualification different than impeachment?

Yes. Someone who is impeached could be disqualified from holding public office in the future if they are convicted, and Congress applies such a punishment. But this is separate from disqualification under the 14th Amendment. Under Sections 3 and 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment, Congress could bar someone from holding office. But unlike an impeachment conviction, that decision could be overturned by the courts. Most importantly, under the 14th Amendment, disqualification requires only a simple majority v**e, not the two-thirds v**e needed to convict during an impeachment trial.”

SOURCE:
https://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment14/annotation15.html
~~~~~~~~~~

(§) Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3:

"No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or e*****r of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in i**********n or r*******n against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof But Congress may by a v**e of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability."

Shutterbug1697 Loc: Northeast

Blurryeyed wrote:

Without a conviction it should not hold water, hell, a DA could indict Biden for bribery and therefore remove him from the b****t according to the logic of this case.

Nope.

That's not what Section-3 of the 14th Amendment applies to! There's absolutely no trial required.

But trump's got bigger problems to worry about.

trump violated the terms of his bail in each case when he held that golden gun in South Carolina.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12559135/Trump-GUN-shopping-Marjorie-Taylor-Greene-829-99-9MM-GLOCK-face.html

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

Wyantry wrote:

b If somehow you cannot read the article, why not... (show quote)

Again, the Section 3 of the 14th Amendment does NOT apply to a President or past President. Noticed it mentions Senators, Representatives, and other public officials but NOT mention Presidents at ALL. Why are so many people so illiterate to that fact. Why would section 3 mention Senators, Representatives, and other public officials but not Presidents? It’s because Presidents do not apply. You can bloviated and highlight all the BS you wish, it’s still not factually accurate.

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

Shutterbug1697 wrote:

Nope.

That's not what Section-3 of the 14th Amendment applies to! There's absolutely no trial required.

But trump's got bigger problems to worry about.

trump violated the terms of his bail in each case when he held that golden gun in South Carolina.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12559135/Trump-GUN-shopping-Marjorie-Taylor-Greene-829-99-9MM-GLOCK-face.html

WRONG AGAIN! Again, the Section 3 of the 14th Amendment does NOT apply to a President or past President. Noticed it mentions Senators, Representatives, and other public officials but NOT mention Presidents at ALL. Why are so many people so illiterate to that fact. Why would section 3 mention Senators, Representatives, and other public officials but not Presidents? It’s because Presidents do not apply. You can bloviated and highlight all the BS you wish, it’s still not factually accurate.

Shutterbug1697 Loc: Northeast

Racmanaz wrote:

WRONG AGAIN! Again, the Section 3 of the 14th Amendment does NOT apply to a President or past President. Noticed it mentions Senators, Representatives, and other public officials but NOT mention Presidents at ALL. Why are so many people so illiterate to that fact. Why would section 3 mention Senators, Representatives, and other public officials but not Presidents? It’s because Presidents do not apply. You can bloviated and highlight all the BS you wish, it’s still not factually accurate.

You can keep blowing your version of what Section-3 of the 14th Amendment applies to out your horn as often as you want to, but it's highly likely that you and those on the right have been listening to incorrect information from trump supporting alleged constitutional scholars.

It will likely be up to SCOTUS to resolve the argument.

The case in Colorado has cleared its first hurdle, a judge has agreed that the case can move forward. And the judge has issued a protective order in the case.

https://coloradonewsline.com/2023/09/22/potential-for-threats-from-trump-in-14th-amendment-case-sways-colorado-judge/

You failed to address my other point that trump violated the terms of his bail agreements when he held that gun in South Carolina.

Read the terms of the bond for the Fulton County e******n case.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/21/politics/read-trump-bond-agreement/index.html

The terms of the Mar-a-Lago documents case bond agreement can be read here.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23846283-trump-bond-conditions

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

Shutterbug1697 wrote:

You can keep blowing your version of what Section-... (show quote)

Doesn't matter how many times or how loud you want to proclaim that section 3 applies to Presidents, you are still WRONG now as you have been WRONG from the start. Even IF the 3 section did apply to Presidents, it still does not legally apply to Trump because he was not involved in the r**t at the Capitol building as the BIG LIARS have claimed.

Shutterbug1697 Loc: Northeast

Racmanaz wrote:

Doesn't matter how many times or how loud you want to proclaim that section 3 applies to Presidents, you are still WRONG now as you have been WRONG from the start. Even IF the 3 section did apply to Presidents, it still does not legally apply to Trump because he was not involved in the r**t at the Capitol building as the BIG LIARS have claimed.

Yet again you've totally ignored the second problem for trump which I pointed out.

You're so stuck on the Section-3 of the 14th Amendment issue.

How about addressing trump's problem with his violating the bail stipulations of at least two of his criminal cases with his handling of the specially made golden gun?

If the rightwingers here on UHH were so dead set on H****r B***n's criminal gun charge, WHY are they suddenly silent about trump's potential gun charge?

Both are criminal violations!

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

Racmanaz wrote:

Again, the Section 3 of the 14th Amendment does NOT apply to a President or past President. Noticed it mentions Senators, Representatives, and other public officials but NOT mention Presidents at ALL. Why are so many people so illiterate to that fact. Why would section 3 mention Senators, Representatives, and other public officials but not Presidents? It’s because Presidents do not apply. You can bloviated and highlight all the BS you wish, it’s still not factually accurate.

” No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or e*****r of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, …”

Rac, what do YOU think is meant by the bolded text?

Triple G

JohnFrim wrote:

” No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or e*****r of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, …”

Rac, what do YOU think is meant by the bolded text?

I want to see Rac dressed in a suit make his argument to a court! One question will shut him down. "Did trump swear an oath to uphold the constitution?". Then Amendment 14 applies!

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

Shutterbug1697 wrote:

Yet again you've totally ignored the second proble... (show quote)

Lol you are deflecting once again, I'm specifically talking about the 14th amendment section 3 only.

Triple G

Racmanaz wrote:

Lol you are deflecting once again, I'm specifically talking about the 14th amendment section 3 only.

It applies to section 3 also. See you in court.