Trump, the 14th and barring from office

[bigrebnc1775]

Huh? What "Dem's lawyer" are you speaking about?

The dem lawyer representing Colorado

 

[Faun]

The dem lawyer representing Colorado

LOLOL

What Dem lawyer? Name them...

 

[bigrebnc1775]

LOLOL

What Dem lawyer? Name them...

Mario Niclais

 

[Faun]

Congress passed an amendment that became law

Retard, an amendment doesn't pass until the states ratify it. Congress only passes a proposal for an amendment.

Dayum, you're too thick to let any knowledge get in.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Retard, an amendment doesn't pass until the states ratify it. Congress only passes a proposal for an amendment.

Dayum, you're too thick to let any knowledge get in.

Passed by Congress June 13, 1866, and ratified July 9, 1868, the 14th Amendment extended liberties and rights granted by the Bill of Rights to formerly enslaved people.

National Archives | › 14th-am...

14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Civil Rights (1868) | National Archives​

 

[Faun]

Mario Niclais

LOLOL

You mean this guy, PussyBitch??





You brain-dead cons are killing me!

 

[Faun]

Passed by Congress June 13, 1866, and ratified July 9, 1868, the 14th Amendment extended liberties and rights granted by the Bill of Rights to formerly enslaved people.
View attachment 899456
National Archives | › 14th-am...

14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Civil Rights (1868) | National Archives​

Retard, they passed a proposal for an amendment. They didn't pass the amendment, the states did that 2 years later when they ratified it.

But tell me again how a Republican lawyer is really a Democrat.

 

[BluesLegend]

Huh? What "Dem's lawyer" are you speaking about?

You know full well now get lost troll.

 

[Faun]

You know full well now get lost troll.

LOL

You mean the "Dem" lawyer PussyBitch mentioned in post #363?

 

[OKTexas]

Passed by Congress June 13, 1866, and ratified July 9, 1868, the 14th Amendment extended liberties and rights granted by the Bill of Rights to formerly enslaved people.
View attachment 899430
National Archives | › 14th-am...

14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Civil Rights (1868) | National Archives​

OMG, congress can PROPOSE an amendment, which is a worthless piece of paper, UNTIL, it is ratified by 3/4ths of the STATES. It's not a law, it's simply a proposal to be submitted to the States for their consideration and possible ratification. If it's not ratified by a sufficient number of States during the term specified, it's as if it never existed. Is that simple enough for you to understand? You didn't read Article 5 of the Constitution, did ya?

.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

OMG, congress can PROPOSE an amendment, which is a worthless piece of paper, UNTIL, it is ratified by 3/4ths of the STATES. It's not a law, it's simply a proposal to be submitted to the States for their consideration and possible ratification. If it's not ratified by a sufficient number of States during the term specified, it's as if it never existed. Is that simple enough for you to understand? You didn't read Article 5 of the Constitution, did ya?

.

What is the very first word from the government source I used?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Retard, they passed a proposal for an amendment. They didn't pass the amendment, the states did that 2 years later when they ratified it.

But tell me again how a Republican lawyer is really a Democrat.

Skippy you fucking retard it's a great day Trump's going to be on the ballot and will be president once again.
M.L.C.A.

 

[OKTexas]

What is the very first word from the government source I used?

Last time I'm going to address this. Tell the class what president signed your supposed law.

Article 5​

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of it's equal Suffrage in the Senate.

.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

LOLOL

You mean this guy, PussyBitch??



View attachment 899458

You brain-dead cons are killing me!

Jason Murray​

‘NOT HIGHFALUTIN’​

Murray, 38, will argue on behalf of Colorado voters who are challenging Trump’s eligibility. He’ll be making his Supreme Court debut in one of the most closely watched cases the court has heard in years.

The majority of Murray’s legal experience has been as a trial lawyer handling commercial litigation for the law firm Bartlit Beck LLP, which is based in Chicago and Denver. Last year, he left that practice to form a boutique firm, Olson Grimsley Kawanabe Hinchcliff & Murray LLC, which seeks “to hold the powerful to account.” Murray declined to comment for this story.

Murray, a graduate of Harvard Law School, is not without experience with the justices, having clerked for two of them, each on a different side of the ideological spectrum. He clerked for Justice Neil Gorsuch during his stint on 10th Circuit U.S. Court Appeals and clerked for Kagan at the Supreme Court.
In a 2017 op-ed in the Washington Post, Murray argued for then-nominee Gorsuch’s confirmation, saying that despite the differences in their politics, his two former bosses shared a common “zeal” for the rule of law.
“For both,” he wrote, “the goal was to reach the correct legal result, rather than advance any political party’s agenda.”

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Last time I'm going to address this. Tell the class what president signed your supposed law.

Article 5​

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of it's equal Suffrage in the Senate.

.

Agree to disagree it has to be passed by Congress first.

 

[OKTexas]

Agree to disagree it has to be passed by Congress first.

If you read article 5, there's no presidential signature required, a president has to sign a law. And yes it requires a 2/3rds vote in both houses, you could call it passed, or you could call it agreed to, but neither automatically make it a law. In the case of the 14th amendment, ratification authorized congress to pass laws to enforce it. So ratification only made it part of the constitution with no force of law, until congress passed the laws and the president signed them. So no, I don't agree to disagree, you're just wrong on this one.

.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

If you read article 5, there's no presidential signature required, a president has to sign a law. And yes it requires a 2/3rds vote in both houses, you could call it passed, or you could call it agreed to, but neither automatically make it a law. In the case of the 14th amendment, ratification authorized congress to pass laws to enforce it. So ratification only made it part of the constitution with no force of law, until congress passed the laws and the president signed them. So no, I don't agree to disagree, you're just wrong on this one.

.

Without it being passed by Congress no state can have an input. It's also a law because it's in the constitution which is the supreme law of the land

 

[OKTexas]

Without it being passed by Congress no state can have an input. It's also a law because it's in the constitution which is the supreme law of the land

Actually if you bothered to read all of article 5, 2/3rds of the States can propose an amendment with no input from congress. Under our Constitution the States are the highest sovereign. They can change the Constitution without any input from any branch of the federal government, if enough agree to do so. Unfortunately, in today's political climate, I don't see 3/4ths of the States agreeing on much of anything.

.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Actually if you bothered to read all of article 5, 2/3rds of the States can propose an amendment with no input from congress. Under our Constitution the States are the highest sovereign. They can change the Constitution without any input from any branch of the federal government, if enough agree to do so. Unfortunately, in today's political climate, I don't see 3/4ths of the States agreeing on much of anything.

.

Ok

 

[Faun]

Skippy you fucking retard it's a great day Trump's going to be on the ballot and will be president once again.
M.L.C.A.

It's good news for Biden. Trump is the only person he can beat.