General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI have a question.....can we the citizens file a lawsuit
under the 14th Amendment Section 3 to prevent , oh I don't know 145 supporting insurrectionist and some senators from being sworn in this coming Jan 3, 2023, after all they said that the last election 2020 was illegal, even though somehow they mostly got re-elected this last time around...and from all accounts they supported the over throwing of a government........why have the 14th Amendment Section 3.....
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
FBaggins
(28,706 posts)It will be kicked out of court, of course. But you can file it
LakeArenal
(29,949 posts)
TigressDem
(5,126 posts)Add the NEVER TRUMPERS and those moderate Republicans angry that their party got hijacked and we might get another million.
What if 9 million people signed on to a group lawsuit to save America from the Insurrectionists?
The Roux Comes First
(2,278 posts)As well as your moniker!
I have no idea what it takes to get a class action lawsuit rolling, but there have to be a few beagles here capable of helping with that.
Ocelot II
(130,538 posts)TigressDem
(5,126 posts)As a body, they are accountable to the people.
8 million people's votes are constantly being called into question, when over 60 lawsuits have shown there was NO WIDESPREAD fraud.
AND violence was done to try and prevent the peaceful transfer of power and is CONTINUED TO BE CALLED FOR by members who swore an OATH to defend the Constitutional Government against such assault.
Recently, we have proof in the Jan 6 Report, but it is highly unlikely that the perpetrators of the insurrection are going to censure themselves.
2) the party opposing the class has acted or refused to act on grounds that apply generally to the class, so that final injunctive relief or corresponding declaratory relief is appropriate respecting the class as a whole; or
Ocelot II
(130,538 posts)Under some narrow circumstances individual members can be sued (for acts outside the scope of their function as members of Congress), and federal agencies can be sued for negligence if the requirements of the Federal Tort Claims Act have been met.
LakeArenal
(29,949 posts)Side note: In WI I signed the recall petition for Scott Walker. When they published the list, I got fired. Now I’m retired. I’d sign anything.
TigressDem
(5,126 posts)Because citizens shouldn't HAVE to intervene?
Because it was looked at as an automatic disqualification for so long?
Because who knew such blatant disregard for the law by those in position of authority would happen under a pRez who stripped away protections and balance protocols by firing anyone who refused to do his illegal bidding?
FBaggins
(28,706 posts)It's a Congressional power in two senses. Constitutional amendments usually have "implementing legislation" that describe how they work. In this scenario, Congress had previously defined "insurrection". It isn't any action that you and I might consider insurrection objectively... it's a federal crime. And thus, you have to be convicted of that crime in order to be punished for it. Congress could, in theory, change that law... but until they do we can't sue to enforce 14A on people we might consider insurrectionists - no matter how reasonable that consideration seems.
The second sense is that Congress does have the power to choose not to seat an incoming member. Usually, that's due to some question about the results of an election, but it would probably include Congress' impression of how 14A should apply to an incoming member.
The problem, in this case, is that we won't have a majority in the House to make that determination.
live love laugh
(16,383 posts)TigressDem
(5,126 posts)WE THE PEOPLE are mentioned in the Constitution. Seems that would be standing enough.
The remedy is ENFORCEMENT of an existing law in a circumstance that has become clear with the evidence provided in the JAN 6 report.
live love laugh
(16,383 posts)TigressDem
(5,126 posts)IF we could remove all those in violation of 14th Amendment Section 3, there would need to be new elections and some remedy until those came to pass would probably keep the DEM majority long enough to finish what the Committee started.
The current House ran out of time due to all the tactics of delay, the lawsuit could give them time to do the job themselves via the 14th Amendment Section 3. The current House has the will and the knowledge, but not the time.
A citizen's group lawsuit might be thrown out but if it even delayed the insurrectionists from taking their place in the house for 30 days, it could be long enough to do it the right way, through Congress.
We would simply be giving millions of voices to back their power to enforce the law that already exists that this group has broken.
IF the rethugs get the House and the states turn into SELECTIONS by those in power instead of actual Elections that express the Will of THE PEOPLE, we are screwed.
These people ONLY want to validate elections when THEY win.
They should not be in power to make that the standard because then voting truly will not make a difference going forward if they are able to pass their laws and remove all people standing up against them.
DO YOU WANT every state to look like Florida? Where the Governor can sue SCIENCE because Covid was bad optics?
FBaggins
(28,706 posts)The outgoing representatives don't retain their seats until the new person is sworn in... their terms are up and they're out.
Things start over fresh on 1/3 and there is no point in which we will have a majority that can reject seating newly elected republicans (or re-seat existing republicans who we consider too close to the insurrectionists). The current House has no power to seat or reject the next House.
TigressDem
(5,126 posts)So a lawsuit by WE THE PEOPLE actually may be the hope once Jan 3rd happens.
Either that or a Continental Congress.
We ARE at WAR with these people. They are bringing guns and taking away citizen rights at every turn.
WE HAVE to be able to use the law while it still exists.
FBaggins
(28,706 posts)No timing would have provided a 2/3 majority to expel a member.
Even were that possible - it wouldn't keep them from retaking the seat in a new Congress when they were reelected.
So a lawsuit by WE THE PEOPLE actually may be the hope once Jan 3rd happens.
I'm afraid you have an active imagination. There is no chance of that getting anywhere in court. And if by some miracle a court were nutty enough to take it, the courts above them would throw it out.
TigressDem
(5,126 posts)Then the others who are coming in need to have court documented reason to be deemed ineligible.
https://www.lawfareblog.com/14th-amendments-disqualification-provision-and-events-jan-6
With respect to sitting members of Congress, Section 3 must be enforced internally, because the Constitution contemplates no other disciplinary process. The most obvious enforcement mechanism is expulsion, which can be done for virtually any reason with a two-thirds vote. During Reconstruction and on one occasion during World War I, Congress enforced Section 3 by refusing to seat members-elect who were deemed ineligible. In Reconstruction, the issue was that these members-elect were involved with the Confederacy. During World War I, the member-elect was convicted under the Espionage Act—a conviction that was later reversed on appeal.
live love laugh
(16,383 posts)in one’s area; and standing might not apply if the plaintiffs didn’t cast direct votes for candidates.
Just my opinion…
TigressDem
(5,126 posts)AS citizens of the United States, we have the right to see the laws on the books enforced.
US citizens just got confirmation of MANY of these people being in violation of AM 14, Sec 3.
THE DAMAGE is to ALL Americans because these people were party to an attack on the Nation's Capitol.
THESE individuals are automatically disqualified according to how the Amendment reads.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/amendment-14/section-3/
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.
live love laugh
(16,383 posts)
TigressDem
(5,126 posts)It's a thought as Beau would say.
I wish we'd had this report sooner, because it's too little too late, most likely.
essaynnc
(986 posts)If I lived in Arizona, and K. Sinema changed parties and actually started voting with the Repubs (?!!), could I sue because I voted for her to stand for Democratic Party principles and she has failed me? I mean, she campaigned on a platform, partially based on siding with the democrats and standing up for their/ our beliefs, and now she's "changed her mind", and is standing for and voting for what I wouldn't want her to stand for!
I think that I would have standing, and perhaps a very good case.
What thinkest thou????
mopinko
(73,726 posts)no such law exists that holds candidates to their actual promises, let alone their implied promises.
Polybius
(21,902 posts)Thank God they can't sue. Imagine if Obama and Biden were sued because they once opposed gay marriage.
Iwasthere
(3,512 posts)We all should be tired of being walked on by these criminals. We give up too easy too, imo.
Sympthsical
(10,969 posts)If we want a remedy for these things, we elect people who will make the decisions we would like them to according to our laws.
Whether that be our representatives using their delegated congressional powers or the executive whom we elect to make appointments throughout the justice system.
The time to act is ever at the ballot box.
If we don't like how that's going, find someone else next time better disposed to seek out the remedies you desire.
If private citizens could just file lawsuits willy nilly because the lawful departments of state aren't following policies they'd prefer, our government would never work. Imagine what kinds of lawsuits the Right would come up with if that were the case.
Ocelot II
(130,538 posts)Sympthsical
(10,969 posts)I understand the reason it exists and how it keeps government functional and cohesive, but then I start war-gaming all these, "But what if . . ." scenarios in my head.
Which is why, I imagine, people go to law school, lol.
Polybius
(21,902 posts)Where are you getting 145 from?