Credence
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2019
- Messages
- 17,856
- Reaction score
- 29,043
- Location
- Long Island NY
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Independent
It's about time this has been raised and happy it is by Conservatives and from the Federalist Society, as I believe it carries more weight
Conservative Case Emerges to Disqualify Trump for Role on Jan. 6
Two law professors active in the Federalist Society wrote that the original meaning of the 14th Amendment makes Donald Trump ineligible to hold government office.
Aug. 10, 2023Updated 4:17 p.m. ET
Two prominent conservative law professors have concluded that Donald J. Trump is ineligible to be president under a provision of the Constitution that bars people who have engaged in an insurrection from holding government office. The professors are active members of the Federalist Society, the conservative legal group, and proponents of originalism, the method of interpretation that seeks to determine the Constitution’s original meaning.
The professors — William Baude of the University of Chicago and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St. Thomas — studied the question for more than a year and detailed their findings in a long article to be published next year in The University of Pennsylvania Law Review.
“When we started out, neither of us was sure what the answer was,” Professor Baude said. “People were talking about this provision of the Constitution. We thought: ‘We’re constitutional scholars, and this is an important constitutional question. We ought to figure out what’s really going on here.’ And the more we dug into it, the more we realized that we had something to add.”
He summarized the article’s conclusion: “Donald Trump cannot be president — cannot run for president, cannot become president, cannot hold office — unless two-thirds of Congress decides to grant him amnesty for his conduct on Jan. 6.”
A law review article will not, of course, change the reality that Mr. Trump is the Republican front-runner and that voters remain free to assess whether his conduct was blameworthy. But the scope and depth of the article may encourage and undergird lawsuits from other candidates and ordinary voters arguing that the Constitution makes him ineligible for office.
Conservative Case Emerges to Disqualify Trump for Role on Jan. 6 (Published 2023)
Two law professors active in the Federalist Society wrote that the original meaning of the 14th Amendment makes Donald Trump ineligible to hold government office.www.nytimes.com
Too bad this won't be published until next year, but I agree, this coming from the Federalist Society is huge. I'm sure this will cause a whole lot of foot stomping rage, especially after he's found guilty! He can add 2 more republican lawyers to his hate list!It's about time this has been raised and happy it is by Conservatives and from the Federalist Society, as I believe it carries more weight
Conservative Case Emerges to Disqualify Trump for Role on Jan. 6
Two law professors active in the Federalist Society wrote that the original meaning of the 14th Amendment makes Donald Trump ineligible to hold government office.
Aug. 10, 2023Updated 4:17 p.m. ET
Two prominent conservative law professors have concluded that Donald J. Trump is ineligible to be president under a provision of the Constitution that bars people who have engaged in an insurrection from holding government office. The professors are active members of the Federalist Society, the conservative legal group, and proponents of originalism, the method of interpretation that seeks to determine the Constitution’s original meaning.
The professors — William Baude of the University of Chicago and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St. Thomas — studied the question for more than a year and detailed their findings in a long article to be published next year in The University of Pennsylvania Law Review.
“When we started out, neither of us was sure what the answer was,” Professor Baude said. “People were talking about this provision of the Constitution. We thought: ‘We’re constitutional scholars, and this is an important constitutional question. We ought to figure out what’s really going on here.’ And the more we dug into it, the more we realized that we had something to add.”
He summarized the article’s conclusion: “Donald Trump cannot be president — cannot run for president, cannot become president, cannot hold office — unless two-thirds of Congress decides to grant him amnesty for his conduct on Jan. 6.”
A law review article will not, of course, change the reality that Mr. Trump is the Republican front-runner and that voters remain free to assess whether his conduct was blameworthy. But the scope and depth of the article may encourage and undergird lawsuits from other candidates and ordinary voters arguing that the Constitution makes him ineligible for office.
Conservative Case Emerges to Disqualify Trump for Role on Jan. 6 (Published 2023)
Two law professors active in the Federalist Society wrote that the original meaning of the 14th Amendment makes Donald Trump ineligible to hold government office.www.nytimes.com
It's about time this has been raised and happy it is by Conservatives and from the Federalist Society, as I believe it carries more weight
Conservative Case Emerges to Disqualify Trump for Role on Jan. 6
Two law professors active in the Federalist Society wrote that the original meaning of the 14th Amendment makes Donald Trump ineligible to hold government office.
Aug. 10, 2023Updated 4:17 p.m. ET
Two prominent conservative law professors have concluded that Donald J. Trump is ineligible to be president under a provision of the Constitution that bars people who have engaged in an insurrection from holding government office. The professors are active members of the Federalist Society, the conservative legal group, and proponents of originalism, the method of interpretation that seeks to determine the Constitution’s original meaning.
The professors — William Baude of the University of Chicago and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St. Thomas — studied the question for more than a year and detailed their findings in a long article to be published next year in The University of Pennsylvania Law Review.
“When we started out, neither of us was sure what the answer was,” Professor Baude said. “People were talking about this provision of the Constitution. We thought: ‘We’re constitutional scholars, and this is an important constitutional question. We ought to figure out what’s really going on here.’ And the more we dug into it, the more we realized that we had something to add.”
He summarized the article’s conclusion: “Donald Trump cannot be president — cannot run for president, cannot become president, cannot hold office — unless two-thirds of Congress decides to grant him amnesty for his conduct on Jan. 6.”
A law review article will not, of course, change the reality that Mr. Trump is the Republican front-runner and that voters remain free to assess whether his conduct was blameworthy. But the scope and depth of the article may encourage and undergird lawsuits from other candidates and ordinary voters arguing that the Constitution makes him ineligible for office.
Conservative Case Emerges to Disqualify Trump for Role on Jan. 6 (Published 2023)
Two law professors active in the Federalist Society wrote that the original meaning of the 14th Amendment makes Donald Trump ineligible to hold government office.www.nytimes.com
Agree it is good news. My sense is that this conservative group did this to try and help their party from losing BIGLY in 2024.
Yeah, but I thought it was a matter of bringing a lawsuit against Trump and having it adjudicated that he was involved in an insurrection and therefore ineligible. But these guys, who claim they researched the matter for what, a year? now assert:We have know about this forever.
That's encouraging.It's about time this has been raised and happy it is by Conservatives and from the Federalist Society, as I believe it carries more weight
Conservative Case Emerges to Disqualify Trump for Role on Jan. 6
Two law professors active in the Federalist Society wrote that the original meaning of the 14th Amendment makes Donald Trump ineligible to hold government office.
Aug. 10, 2023Updated 4:17 p.m. ET
Two prominent conservative law professors have concluded that Donald J. Trump is ineligible to be president under a provision of the Constitution that bars people who have engaged in an insurrection from holding government office. The professors are active members of the Federalist Society, the conservative legal group, and proponents of originalism, the method of interpretation that seeks to determine the Constitution’s original meaning.
The professors — William Baude of the University of Chicago and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St. Thomas — studied the question for more than a year and detailed their findings in a long article to be published next year in The University of Pennsylvania Law Review.
“When we started out, neither of us was sure what the answer was,” Professor Baude said. “People were talking about this provision of the Constitution. We thought: ‘We’re constitutional scholars, and this is an important constitutional question. We ought to figure out what’s really going on here.’ And the more we dug into it, the more we realized that we had something to add.”
He summarized the article’s conclusion: “Donald Trump cannot be president — cannot run for president, cannot become president, cannot hold office — unless two-thirds of Congress decides to grant him amnesty for his conduct on Jan. 6.”
A law review article will not, of course, change the reality that Mr. Trump is the Republican front-runner and that voters remain free to assess whether his conduct was blameworthy. But the scope and depth of the article may encourage and undergird lawsuits from other candidates and ordinary voters arguing that the Constitution makes him ineligible for office.
Conservative Case Emerges to Disqualify Trump for Role on Jan. 6 (Published 2023)
Two law professors active in the Federalist Society wrote that the original meaning of the 14th Amendment makes Donald Trump ineligible to hold government office.www.nytimes.com
Devil's bargain.The federalist society got their SCOTUS so now they are kicking Trump to the curb.
In both directions.Devil's bargain.
Yep, an attempted insurrection is the same as a successful insurrection to commit a coup d'é·tat.It's about time this has been raised and happy it is by Conservatives and from the Federalist Society, as I believe it carries more weight
Conservative Case Emerges to Disqualify Trump for Role on Jan. 6
Two law professors active in the Federalist Society wrote that the original meaning of the 14th Amendment makes Donald Trump ineligible to hold government office.
Aug. 10, 2023Updated 4:17 p.m. ET
Two prominent conservative law professors have concluded that Donald J. Trump is ineligible to be president under a provision of the Constitution that bars people who have engaged in an insurrection from holding government office. The professors are active members of the Federalist Society, the conservative legal group, and proponents of originalism, the method of interpretation that seeks to determine the Constitution’s original meaning.
The professors — William Baude of the University of Chicago and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St. Thomas — studied the question for more than a year and detailed their findings in a long article to be published next year in The University of Pennsylvania Law Review.
“When we started out, neither of us was sure what the answer was,” Professor Baude said. “People were talking about this provision of the Constitution. We thought: ‘We’re constitutional scholars, and this is an important constitutional question. We ought to figure out what’s really going on here.’ And the more we dug into it, the more we realized that we had something to add.”
He summarized the article’s conclusion: “Donald Trump cannot be president — cannot run for president, cannot become president, cannot hold office — unless two-thirds of Congress decides to grant him amnesty for his conduct on Jan. 6.”
A law review article will not, of course, change the reality that Mr. Trump is the Republican front-runner and that voters remain free to assess whether his conduct was blameworthy. But the scope and depth of the article may encourage and undergird lawsuits from other candidates and ordinary voters arguing that the Constitution makes him ineligible for office.
Conservative Case Emerges to Disqualify Trump for Role on Jan. 6 (Published 2023)
Two law professors active in the Federalist Society wrote that the original meaning of the 14th Amendment makes Donald Trump ineligible to hold government office.www.nytimes.com
It is but I don't think that's really the question. The question to me is whether Trump needs to be criminally convicted of participation in an insurrection before the 14th amendment can be invoked. I was hoping that the summary would address that point - even at 30,000 feet - but it doesn't so we'll have to wait until the full article is published to see the what the authors' take is.Yep, an attempted insurrection is the same as a successful insurrection to commit a coup d'é·tat.
Just the conspiracy part of it is enough.It is but I don't think that's really the question. The question to me is whether Trump needs to be criminally convicted of participation in an insurrection before the 14th amendment can be invoked. I was hoping that the summary would address that point - even at 30,000 feet - but it doesn't so we'll have to wait until the full article is published to see the what the authors' take is.
Meaningless drivel by a couple of clowns. Doesn't apply to Trump at all, it was for the Civil War.It's about time this has been raised and happy it is by Conservatives and from the Federalist Society, as I believe it carries more weight
I agree. My question is really does it require a conviction. Or is it enough to say - "Enough people think he was the ringleader of an insurrection conspiracy and that's good enough."Just the conspiracy part of it is enough.
For all the good it will do them. Trump has the GOP nonination sewn up. Rank and file Republicans may not be MAGA but if polling is accurate they are prepared to support another 4 years of Trumpism in the WH.The federalist society got their SCOTUS so now they are kicking Trump to the curb.
The only really "new" thing about the article is that it is coming from "prominent conservative law professors". Some "prominent liberal law professors" have been saying the same thing for some time.It's about time this has been raised and happy it is by Conservatives and from the Federalist Society, as I believe it carries more weight
Conservative Case Emerges to Disqualify Trump for Role on Jan. 6
Two law professors active in the Federalist Society wrote that the original meaning of the 14th Amendment makes Donald Trump ineligible to hold government office.
Aug. 10, 2023Updated 4:17 p.m. ET
Two prominent conservative law professors have concluded that Donald J. Trump is ineligible to be president under a provision of the Constitution that bars people who have engaged in an insurrection from holding government office. The professors are active members of the Federalist Society, the conservative legal group, and proponents of originalism, the method of interpretation that seeks to determine the Constitution’s original meaning.
The professors — William Baude of the University of Chicago and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St. Thomas — studied the question for more than a year and detailed their findings in a long article to be published next year in The University of Pennsylvania Law Review.
“When we started out, neither of us was sure what the answer was,” Professor Baude said. “People were talking about this provision of the Constitution. We thought: ‘We’re constitutional scholars, and this is an important constitutional question. We ought to figure out what’s really going on here.’ And the more we dug into it, the more we realized that we had something to add.”
He summarized the article’s conclusion: “Donald Trump cannot be president — cannot run for president, cannot become president, cannot hold office — unless two-thirds of Congress decides to grant him amnesty for his conduct on Jan. 6.”
A law review article will not, of course, change the reality that Mr. Trump is the Republican front-runner and that voters remain free to assess whether his conduct was blameworthy. But the scope and depth of the article may encourage and undergird lawsuits from other candidates and ordinary voters arguing that the Constitution makes him ineligible for office.
Conservative Case Emerges to Disqualify Trump for Role on Jan. 6 (Published 2023)
Two law professors active in the Federalist Society wrote that the original meaning of the 14th Amendment makes Donald Trump ineligible to hold government office.www.nytimes.com
Trying to eat their cake and have it too. This is a nonsensical position that is safe to take because it will never actually be reality. Trump is not convicted of treason or insurrection. There is negative ten thousand percent chance that SCOTUS chooses to enforce this without such a conviction. So they establish a hm hm yes decorum decorum position but don’t really harm Trump because theres no practical effect.The federalist society got their SCOTUS so now they are kicking Trump to the curb.
and 2/3rds of them at that. That's a steep hill to climb!Well, shit. The federalist society and I agree about something. Section 3 disqualifies him, and only an act of congress can reverse that.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?