Post #13329 by WatchingTheHerd on the US Policy board

Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy ❤

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (14)

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

No. of Recommendations: 5

Clearly, an attempted insurrection happened. Clearly, that invalidates anyone involved from running for office per the Constitution.

------------

The implications of the questions posed by multiple justices are that

* Section 3 is NOT "self-executing",
* enforcement will REQUIRE conviction under the federal statute (originally enacted
in the 1870s, now under Title 18, Section 2383 as of 1948) for insurrection, and
* in the absence of a conviction under THAT statute, no one can be barred under Section 3

As Neil Katyal put it immediately after the conclusion of oral arguments, the Supreme Court treated the Constitution like the US tax code, looking for any loophole by which they could allow Trump to escape the clear intent of Section 3.

WTH

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

Print the post

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (14)

Prev | Next

Announcements

US Policy FAQ

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

A community forum supporting civilized, and highly helpful, self-educating investors that come together for Shrewdness and merry spirits. These message boards closely follow the look and feel of the old message boards at boards.fool.com prior to the boards redirected to discussion.fool.com. Shrewd'm is not affiliated with the comprehensive and excellent investment website, The Motley Fool (TMF), in any way. The Shrewd commmunity here has owed, and continues to owe, gratitude to The Motley Fool for nurturing a culture of jovial irreverence towards Wall St, and that tradition will continue here.