Sunday, December 31, 2023

The Rest Of The Fourteenth

Lately we've heard a lot about the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, but most of it has dealt only with one of its clauses (14.3). I think it's time to look at the other four clauses (14.1, 14.2, 14.4, and 14.5) to see how they may apply to the issue of Donald Trump's candidacy for a second term as US President.

[You can find the full text of the amendment here, along with some pertinent references - https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/amendment-14/]

Section 1 Rights

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

As a natural born US citizen, Mr. Trump is eligible to be US President. At issue is whether he is disqualified to hold that office under clause 14.3 of the subject amendment. I believe the failure to establish such disqualification via due process of law violates both clause 14.3 itself and clause 14.1, making such putative disqualification invalid.

Section 2 Apportionment of Representation

Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

I believe that States which deny their residents the right to vote for Mr. Trump are in violation of this clause, and their representation in Congress should be appropriately reduced. Take note the right to vote referenced in this clause is not affected by the events of January 6, 2021, since the vast majority of voters had nothing to do with that alleged rebellion or any other crime.

Section 3 Disqualification from Holding Office

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector 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 insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Note this clause refers only to disqualification to HOLD office, not to RUN for office. And since clause 14.1 does not allow States to abridge privileges (such as running for or holding office), I believe only Congress has the ability to disqualify a candidate via this clause or to certify their electors and their subsequent election.

Section 4 Public Debt

The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

I do not believe this clause applies to the current discussion.

Section 5 Enforcement

The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

I believe this clause gives the US Congress and ONLY Congress the power to enforce this article, making the recent (and possible future) actions of State Attorneys General and other actors invalid.

At this point, it's worthwhile to mention several other States may be contemplating similar denial and abridgement of the rights and privileges of Mr. Trump and millions of other US citizens. You can find such a claim here:

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/co-me-just-start-trump-ballot-blocking-these-20-states-have-suits-progress

I believe we the electorate should demand an investigation whether or not such lawsuits are the result of collusion among several parties to illegally deny or abridge our electoral rights and privileges, who such parties might be, and whether or not prosecuting them under the RICO Statues (18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-68) is warranted.

Or are such prosecutions now confined to abortion protesters and their organizations?

Update - 1/4/2024

I believe the above interpretation validates the allegedly "debunked" theory that legislatures (and ONLY the legislatures) of the States are constitutionally empowered to prescribe The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections and of appointing a Number of Electors (as specified in Article 1, Section 4, para. 1 and Article 2, Section 1, para. 2 of our Constitution). There is a compelling logic for assigning such authority TO THE PEOPLE and their elected legislatures and NOT allowing other parties to meddle in such matters.

Update - 2/9/2024

Note well that Representative Gaetz made most of the same arguments I did in my original 12/31/2023 blog post:

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/rep-matt-gaetz-introduces-resolution-saying-trump-didnt-engage-insurrection

Nice to know that at least one person in Congress has actually READ the US Constitution. It would be even nicer if the rest of them and the so-called legal experts would do the same.

By the way, Gaetz's bill either will result in a signed resolution or it won't. Time to start debating the ultimate impact of both outcomes. I doubt it could get through the Senate.

No comments:

Post a Comment