Conservative

481 readers

166 users here now

A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff

Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.

A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.

founded 1 year ago

-22

Only congress has the power to enforce the 14th amendment, not the states, according to Section 5. (constitution.congress.gov)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

5 comments fedilink hide all child comments

If they wanted the states to have the power, they would have mentioned the states.

all 6 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Legal precedent says otherwise

https://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Chart-of-Past-14.3-Disqualifications-rev.-07.10.23.pdf

And "shall have" and "Is the only government entity that shall have" are two different things. And other legal precedent, such as with the establishment clause has previously been ruled such that "congress" ends up basically equating to the government as a whole.

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

[+] [email protected] -7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Also section three lists out a lot of positions, but fails to mention the presidency itself. Odd oversight, don't y'all think?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State

It’s pretty clear if you read it.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It doesn't list that many. Did you know this exact question came up at the time the Amendment was being drafted? https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/lsb/lsb10569

Specifically:

One scholar notes that the drafting history of Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment suggests that the office of the President is covered:

During the debate on Section Three, one Senator asked why ex-Confederates “may be elected President or Vice President of the United States, and why did you all omit to exclude them? I do not understand them to be excluded from the privilege of holding the two highest offices in the gift of the nation.” Another Senator replied that the lack of specific language on the Presidency and Vice- Presidency was irrelevant: “Let me call the Senator’s attention to the words ‘or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States.’”

I'll highlight that last bit again:

Another Senator replied that the lack of specific language on the Presidency and Vice- Presidency was irrelevant: “Let me call the Senator’s attention to the words ‘or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States.’”

That is from this paper: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3748639

There you go. You can stop being a traitor now, please and thanks.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

The president is included. Poorly worded sure, but not a loophole.

as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Officer_of_the_United_States