Have Critics of Colorado and Maine Suggested Removing Section 3 of the 14th Amendment?

[Crick]

I have not seen such a comment anywhere, but the condemnations of actually acting on it have been intense. Why do these same people not suggest removing that criteria?

 

[BluesLegend]

The liberal arts hack in Maine has zero legal experience to interpret the Constitution or make a legal decision. She's also on record with disagreeing with the Constitution and a known never Trumper who has been invited to the White House twice. She should recuse herself.

 

[MinTrut]

I have not seen such a comment anywhere, but the condemnations of actually acting on it have been intense. Why do these same people not suggest removing that criteria?

Bizarre question.

One doesn't remove laws against murder because innocent people are sometimes wrongly accused.

14/3 is fine; Democrats are grossly misusing it to continue their seditious rape of the country/arsonous rampage.

8 years and counting...

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The Supreme Court might well remove it. It applied to a unique circumstance that no longer exists.

 

[BackAgain]

I have not seen such a comment anywhere, but the condemnations of actually acting on it have been intense. Why do these same people not suggest removing that criteria?

Maybe somewhere down the road.

Not a very practical solution for its current misuse.

 

[Crick]

Bizarre question.

One doesn't remove laws against murder because innocent people are sometimes wrongly accused.

14/3 is fine; Democrats are grossly misusing it to continue their seditious rape of the country/arsonous rampage.

8 years and counting...

What would be a proper use of 14/3?

 

[Crick]

The Supreme Court might well remove it. It applied to a unique circumstance that no longer exists.

The Supreme Court does not have the power to modify the Constitution.

 

[Crick]

Maybe somewhere down the road.

Not a very practical solution for its current misuse.

Because it would take too long?

 

[BackAgain]

Because it would take too long?

It sure would.

To repeal even a portion of the 14th Amendment would require the passage of an amendment. That takes lots of time.

 

[Lakhota]

What will Alaska do?

 

[MinTrut]

What would be a proper use of 14/3?

Not this use, and also not your topic as outlined; this was a Civil War thing, and Trump did nothing wrong.

 

[MinTrut]

What will Alaska do?

What will SCOTUS do?

This insanity needs to stop ASAP.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The Supreme Court does not have the power to modify the Constitution.

Recognizing that a constitutional provision had limited applicability is not modifying anything.

 

[OKTexas]

I have not seen such a comment anywhere, but the condemnations of actually acting on it have been intense. Why do these same people not suggest removing that criteria?

There's no need to make such a call. Both Maine and CO made fatal errors in their proceedings. According to the 9 circuit, individual voters don't have standing to challenge a candidates placement on a ballot. The supremes refused to take up an appeal of that decision. So it is currently standing precedent. They will likely cite that case in dismissing both proceedings and precluding similar ones.

See: Drake, et al. v. Obama, et al.; Barnett, et al. v. Obama, et al., No. 09-56827 (9th Cir. 2011)

Drake, et al. v. Obama, et al.; Barnett, et al. v. Obama, et al., No. 09-56827 (9th Cir. 2011)

Plaintiffs contended that Barack Obama was constitutionally ineligible to be President of the United States. In addition to plaintiffs' constitutional claims, as well as their claims for declaratory and injunctive relief, plaintiffs appealed the dismissal of their quo warranto claims for...

law.justia.com

.

 

[OKTexas]

What will Alaska do?

See post 14 commie.

.