Why hasn't the Fourteenth Amendment been repealed?

[kentuck]

If it is no longer relative, wouldn't it be like the Amendment to repeal Prohibition?

Otherwise, how is it any different from any other Amendment still in the Constitution?

I cannot see how any constitutional scholar could argue against the Fourteenth Amendment as not relevant, or not in any way related, to the events that transpired on January 6th, 2021?

When Ft Sumter was attacked, a bunch of insurrectionists fired on a small cadre of Union soldiers that were manning the small fort off the coast of South Carolina. It was an attack upon our government.

But it could be argued that it was not as serious as threatening the lives of our Congressmen and Senators in our Nation's Capitol, which is what happened on January 6th, 2021. Some were running for their lives.

Everyone seems to expect the Supreme Court to rule that the Fourteenth Amendment is irrelevant in some manner or other. The only way to do that is to resort to pure politics. That is not to say that the Supreme Court is above politics.

[ColinC]

1. 2nd amendment relevant but 14th amendment not is the mental gymnastics required to be a maga

[kentuck]

2. I think the CO Supreme Court has put the US Supreme Court in rather a bind?

How can they not rule on the decision?

[FakeNoose]

3. It hasn't been repealed because it's still relevant today

I'm not a lawyer, but I am a citizen and voter in the United States of America. I have a college education including studies in American Government. (It wasn't my major, but it has always been a subject dear to my heart.) The 14th Amendment was almost forgotten for most of my life. However, it has suddenly - since Jan. 6th, 2021 - become significant to all of us.

The Supreme Court will do their job when the time comes. I truly believe it, maybe because I want to believe it. "Judicial restraint" is built into the system, and all federal judges have the same desire to adhere to this principle.

Basically judicial restraint means that judges know that they don't make the law, they apply the law fairly and equally in every decision. Whenever a federal judge fails to use judicial restraint, he or she will be called onto the carpet by our appellate court system. That's why our system has worked these 235 (or so) years.

I know we have smart people on this forum, and many lawyers are here to tell me whether I have this right. (I hope!)

SCOTUS won't fail us. As long as we have a Democrat in the White House, our executive branch won't fail us. It's important that we believe in the process and keep electing Democrats to both houses of Congress. If we voters drop the ball, then shame on us. The "house of cards" cannot be allowed to fall.

[LiberalFighter]

20. It was intended to be relevant at that time and in the future.

[Mysterian]

4. The 14th Amendment is why the Bill of Rights, etc. applies to the states

Talk of repealing it is kind of stupid.

[malaise]

5. Why is it OK for the courts rule on the 2nd Amebdment but not the

14th.

The hacks at M$Greedia and their guests are defending BS.

[former9thward]

6. There are a number of irrelevant sections of the Constitution.

The 3rd amendment for one. I doubt anyone is going to have to put up soldiers in their home. Article 1, Section 9, Clause 1, which prohibits the slave trade expired in 1808 by its own language. But it's still there.

[Retrograde]

9. That's my favorite amendment!

Don't go dissing the 3rd - the only amendment that never resulted in a court case.

Given the fascistic trend we've been seeing in the last few years, though, I wouldn't be surprised if the MAGAts will try to foist militia on people if they get more power. What patriotic Murican wouldn't want to host some military people?

[WarGamer]

7. The argument isn't whether it's still relevant...

The question is how do you deem someone to have committed insurrection triggering the 14th...

One side thinks a Judge can make that call the other thinks a Jury must decide.

SCOTUS will be the final voice.

[Retrograde]

8. It's the basis for corporate citizenship

Santa Clara County vs Southern Pacific Railroad, in 1886. I can see the wacko branch of the GOP trying to amend the amendment, though, since the first thing it does is grant citizenship to everyone born in the US - even *those* people.

[paleotn]

10. It's not irrelevant. Just misinterpreted based on current politics.

Its various sections are the basis of numerous SCOTUS decisions over the decades, including Brown v Board. Just not Section 3 lately. The one that applies to Orange Donnie and his merry band of fascist scum. Ironic thing is, it's originalists who most often misinterpret it intentionally.

[J_William_Ryan]

11. "Everyone seems to expect the Supreme Court to rule that the Fourteenth Amendment is irrelevant..."

Not irrelevant; rather, not applicable.

And everyone expects the Court will rule that Section 3 is not applicable because it’s dominated by six corrupt, blind partisan conservative ideologues, having nothing to do with the merits of the case or Section 3.

[William Seger]

12. I'm afraid they'll just say it doesn't apply because TFG wasn't convicted of insurrection

If they let the disqualification stand, that would be affirming that TFG is guilty of insurrection, and I'm having a hard time imagining a majority of this SC doing that.

[Voltaire2]

13. The fascists and their predecessors the KKK

and their enablers, unfortunately in both parties in varying degrees since the end of the civil war, have subverted, ignored, and obstructed the 14th. The historic realignment of white nationalists with the Republican Party is now in full bloom as the Maga fascists have become the dominant faction. It remains to be seen just how far down the reactionary authoritarian path we are going to go.

[Polybius]

14. I'd rather repeal the 22nd

Imagine Obama in his 4th term...

[Rebl2]

15. Doubtful he

wants that headache of a fourth term. Pretty sure his wife would not like it.

[Polybius]

16. Maybe a third term though, if he could have ran again in 2016

Wonder what the 2020 election would have looked like.

[Rebl2]

17. Yes third term

Sorry for mistakes. I am very tired.

[brooklynite]

18. Nothing wrong with it once you've established someone has engaged in insurrection

Hasn’t happened so far in my opinion.

[kentuck]

19. I think that is close to where the US Supreme Court will rule...

Insurrection is still an open question in many minds. It seems obvious to most of us.