(This is an opinion piece. These are my educated opinions on any possible or probable outcome(s). As always, I do not support any illegal or unconstitutional activities.)
Hello everyone! This topic is a follow up to my previous blog “SCOTUS and the 14th”.
That blog was about the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution, Section 3, and the upcoming “interpretation” of it by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS).
(This is an opinion piece. These are my, educated, opinions on any possible, or probable, outcome(s). As always, I do not support any illegal or unconstitutional activities.)
This is the complete wording of the 14th Amendment, Section 3, in the Constitution:
“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 and comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such a disability.”
Here is a quote from my previous blog:
“On first brush, and on a deep dive into the wording of the Constitution, it is evident that there is no doubt of what the framers of the Constitution meant by this. It makes it clear that anyone involved, or supportive of those involved, in Insurrection are not eligible to hold any employment with the State or Federal governments.
Let me know your thoughts on this.
And then let’s see what SCOTUS says…”
Well, SCOTUS has spoken. They say they are reticent to overturn any State decision, and this would be especially true if it is a State’s Supreme Court being overturned. However, SCOTUS’s decision was to overrule Colorado’s decision. And to give full authority to Congress to “enforce” (or, more aptly, not enforce) the Constitution’s amendments. I will explain what I mean throughout this blog. But first, here is SCOTUS’s decision:
The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has unanimously voted to effectively overturn section 3 of the 14th Amendment. This is probably the most damaging thing the Supreme Court has ever done. They have created a precedent that Constitutional amendments can, in some cases, only be enforced by the creation of new laws to support them and only from Congress. Effectively, as of now, all 27 Amendments can only be enforced at the federal, not state, level; in any situation where it affects something at the “federal” level. Guess how long it will take to start to work on the other 26? You can speed that process up dramatically if MAGA gets control in 2025.
SCOTUS’ ruling says that states cannot deny someone being on the ballot even if they are an insurrectionist. Only if Congress successfully impeaches them. Well, they had the most obvious insurrectionist act to ever occur on American soil; and they protected the leader of that insurrection, Donald Trump, from any consequences or impeachment. So, what do you think the future holds if he is reelected?
SCOTUS’s upholding, or overturning, a lower court’s ruling (which invariably comes from the state level, I would like to point out) has enormous power! Not only does it become the law of the land for all 50 states and the nation, but also sets what is known as “precedent” that future cases will use to argue for new laws.
They overturned the Colorado Supreme court’s decision that an insurrectionist cannot hold state or federal office, which is exactly what it says in our US Constitution.
SCOTUS overruled the Colorado Supreme court’s ruling and effectively said “Yes, an insurrectionist can run, and you must allow them to be on the ballot and to hold office.”
So, the States, where the person running for congressional or presidential office always runs, are not allowed to enforce the 14th Amendment, Section 3.
“That’s not true!” I can hear MAGA screaming even now…
Well, let’s look shall we…
Let’s give a hypothetical: Suppose someone wants to run for Congress or to become the President of the United States after SCOTUS made their ruling, and this is your person:
This person was convicted of insurrection (not the easier to prove charges of sedition and conspiracy, but convicted of insurrection), served a prison sentence for it, and was now out on parole. The state cannot legally stop them from running for federal office. (Don’t worry, they can at least stop them from holding state or local positions – for now). This person could become a Congressperson or POTUS legally now.
This is what I wrote in my book, that was published before this ruling came out:
“Based on precedent, I think the scary part is that judges are potentially saying, “Don’t worry about it, the GOP in Congress will ensure the Fourteenth Amendment is being followed. Just like they impartially reviewed the evidence in two impeachments and came to the correct decision based on all the facts.” From “Is MAGA a Terrorist Movement?” on page 46.
This ominous warning that I had given? Well, it has come true, it is the law now. Congress is now the ONLY body allowed to enforce constitutional decisions regarding the 14th amendment for a federal position. Well, for now. We will see their power grow and start to affect anything that they determine is deemed “federal” in the future…
This is a precedent that will be used to justify ALL amendments being enforced (or not enforced) by… Congress??
Last time I checked, Congress is the legislative branch, not the executive branch. That means they make laws, they do not enforce or interpret (the executive and judicial branches, respectively, are supposed to do that). What this means is anything determined to be applicable at the “Federal” level cannot be enforced at the “State” level. Guess what this will be used to justify later? It will allow MAGA to pass laws at the state or federal level and then, if needed, block others at the state, or even local, level using the justification that it is a “federal issue”. Or even using the power of SCOTUS to continue helping the goals of the Conservative right and MAGA by making new rulings on future issues – using the same rationale.
The five conservative justices went a step beyond merely striking down the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision to enforce and uphold our Constitution. This is what Justice Barrett wrote (she and the four liberal Justices “dissented” but still voted for it):
“The majority’s choice of a different path leaves the remaining Justices with a choice of how to respond”.
May I suggest yelling loudly while hitting the “yes” button next time? Or perhaps yelling into a pillow while voting to agree?
She added “The Court has settled a politically charged issue in the volatile season of a Presidential election. Particularly in this circumstance, writings on the Court should turn the national temperature down, not up.”
So… that is their job now: To keep the Nation’s “temperature” at a certain level? They didn’t care too much about “the Court should turn the national temperature down, not up.” when they overturned Roe v. Wade.
Also, their job is not to be peacekeepers or “Custodians of the Nation’s temperature”, it is to enforce the constitutionality of our laws. They have gone 100% against that. There is no world where the 14th amendment is not a constitutional law that must be followed.
SCOTUS’ rational? That states can’t make the determination of whether to disallow an insurrectionist from being on the ballot for a federal position. Or, by precedent now, to enforce any part of the Constitution at all in those circumstances. Even though SCOTUS was unanimous in their vote, they had a 5-4 dissention (as if that matters at all) with all the Conservatives except Justice Barrett fully agreeing to give congress this new power.
The state is where the ballot is registered for a candidate for Congress or POTUS. There is no national level ballot for that. You must run at the state level for these national offices, that’s why all those Congresspersons have things like (R-La) – which means Republican from the state of Louisiana – next to their names. And it is the States that cast the electoral votes for POTUS.
SCOTUS also said: 1) Not only can individual states not enforce their decision that the 14th Amendment of the Constitution must be followed, but 2) That they must allow insurrectionists on the ballot for any federal position henceforth.
They also said that only Congress can enforce the 14th Amendment. No guys. Congress’s only “enforcement” is impeachment. Which only applies to someone that is currently in office. Otherwise, enforcement is the job of the executive branch. What about the judicial branch? That is the mandate of SCOTUS, to interpret the law. Now, I guess they will be splitting that power with Congress. A clear violation of the separation of powers between independent branches of government. And another hit to the “checks and balances” of our liberal democracy. Strangely, I think their decision itself is unconstitutional. It unconstitutionally gives judicial (interpreting) authority, of our Constitution, to Congress. Congress now has the dual mandate of interpreting it and enforcing it (or not). Add in that they are the legislative branch already and now we can see what our new and improved Congress is:
Congress can make laws (as it is supposed to). But now they can also “interpret” whether something is constitutional and can enforce (or not enforce as we have already seen) said laws. At least in any circumstance they deem to apply to a “federal position or office”.
Ever seen a movie called “Judge Dread”? It is the reason we are supposed to have multiple, independent branches of government. If all three are combined into one branch you have allowed one branch to have the roles of Judge, Jury, and Executioner.
That is, albeit for now only in specific circumstances, all three of our government branches consolidated into Congress alone. That is one small aspect of our liberal democracy gone. Now we just need one party rule with a dictator (or “powerful president”) in charge. Then the real work on dismantling the Constitution can begin. They do not even need to have labels. There is no need to even repeal. They (Congress and SCOTUS) can just “not enforce” when it is in MAGA’s best interest (along with their extremist, reactionary “traditional pseudo-Christian values”). What about when something goes against MAGA’s agenda? Well, in those cases it must be enforced, of course! We are already seeing our most valued Amendments being attacked and invalidated.
If they can effectively create one party rule, and put extra powers into the presidency, they can achieve their goal of fascist control of our government. Am I being over the top? Look at what has been happening, and is happening, and let me know….
I really do not want any more of my “prognostications”, about MAGA’s success in the US, to come true.
But this is a stark example of where we are headed, thanks to the influence of MAGA and the ultra-conservative right. SCOTUS can’t rule on something like whether to allow drag shows, but they can effectively invalidate our Constitutional Amendments and force states not to act on them. They can overturn Roe v Wade.
But now only Congress can pass a law to stop insurrectionists. That WAS the 14th Amendment. It just had to be enforced. And it was… by Colorado.
The 14th Amendment, section 3, has now been effectively overturned. What Amendment, that Congress will now have to pass a new law on, for it to be enforced, will be unenforceable next? How about the first amendment? That is what I would attack, if I were MAGA.
Or how about a ruling that homosexuality is not protected, and laws can be passed to criminalize it. Or that religion, or aspects of religion, can be passed into law. Or that the free press can be “restricted” in “certain circumstances” (or some other nebulous phrasing). Or better yet, now they can say only Congress can decide if an unconstitutional act can be stopped.
The scariest part about this isn’t even that Trump can run as an Insurrectionist (although that is plenty scary). The scary part is they just created an incredible new power that will be used by MAGA to change America forever, and not for the better. Even if MAGA doesn’t come into power, they just severely damaged the checks and balances of our “separate, independent branches of government.”
SCOTUS just said that an Amendment in the Constitution can ONLY be enforced by Congress. I bet we won’t have to wait long to see more examples of our laws being “forcefully un-enforced” at the federal level. If the only way to enforce our Constitution is for Congress to pass NEW laws, to enforce ones that already exist, we know that is not going to happen. I am becoming more concerned for America’s future. What if MAGA gets their “dictator loving POTUS” and full control of Congress?
If they do, especially now, the Constitution and our liberal democracy will die. Slowly at first, but then picking up speed with each new “win.” This must be stopped. Even if it were the democrats doing it (they aren’t), it would need to be stopped. Our checks and balances and separate, independent branches of government must be preserved. Our US Constitution must be fully enforceable by all governments in the United States: Federal, State, and Local.
Let’s end this blog with another quote by Justice Barrett on the issue:
“For present purposes, our differences are far less important than our unanimity: All nine Justices agree on the outcome of this case. That is the message Americans should take home.”
Oh, we have. Message received, loud and clear. SCOTUS, with a 6-3 Conservative majority, is starting to bow to the will of MAGA. And the dissenters on SCOTUS are also bowing to them. Voting for something is just that. No one cares about their “dissent” comments if they didn’t vote against it.
Thank you for reading. And thank you for fighting to keep America the “Land of the Free.”
