Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Swalwell says Speaker Johnson is refusing to seat newly elected Dem Tom Souzzi [View all]bucolic_frolic
(55,229 posts)72. That sounds true, especially in the modern era
It ignores 14A Sec 3 which posits a situation where an insurrectionist has been excluded from taking his seat and must seek a 2/3 majority to admit him, or her.
We are in for some litigation if this stuff unfolds in the wrong direction.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
97 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Swalwell says Speaker Johnson is refusing to seat newly elected Dem Tom Souzzi [View all]
Nevilledog
Feb 2024
OP
They don't believe the laws are applicable to them. They'll have to be forced.
Nevilledog
Feb 2024
#3
Yea, what would happen if he just showed up for work? If they wanted to say something about it at least
Maraya1969
Feb 2024
#66
Sure. One doesn't even have to believe in the devil to know that evil folk can pervert scripture to make the Bible look
ancianita
Feb 2024
#88
Hard to tell. I've read that the Catholic Bible is also called the New Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition
ancianita
Feb 2024
#91
Meh. It's a spiritual contest that's not at all in the spirit of Jesus' teachings. That's another
ancianita
Feb 2024
#94
Yep! Oftentimes, the method of religion is more important than the God of religion.
keithbvadu2
Feb 2024
#96
The Republicans are a white nationalist crime syndicate, theocratic domestic terrorist organization,
TheKentuckian
Feb 2024
#57
This precedent is irrelevant. Suozzi hasn't been seated because the House went on recess on the 15th
onenote
Feb 2024
#48
Yeah well, this Supreme Court doesn't seem to believe in precedents that don't benefit the right wing.
unblock
Feb 2024
#5
I reckon we could take them to court. We may get a final decision in three or four years.
Midnight Writer
Feb 2024
#53
This. We have lots of laws on the books. We also have a judicial system that can be manipulated to
Scrivener7
Feb 2024
#55
When he won the race and when the win was certified by election officials aren't the same thing.
brooklynite
Feb 2024
#38
I think you have it. They're going to dispute every election a Democrat wins. Every one.
Liberal In Texas
Feb 2024
#33
The official certification of his election would have had to be transmitted to the House first.
onenote
Feb 2024
#43
Because they repubs don't know what the fuck they're doing. But it's not to keep Suozzi from being sworn in.
onenote
Feb 2024
#46
Yes. I do. Because looking at every special election held the last couple of years, there has been at least a week lag
onenote
Feb 2024
#49
Maga Moses Mike's behavior pretty much proves Joy Reid's concerns about House GOP being dangerous to election security
Attilatheblond
Feb 2024
#52
Effing idiots do not know how it all works and listen to a Russian foil who pretends he knows everything.
Ford_Prefect
Feb 2024
#70
Now that everyone has had a chance to rant, here's the Board of Election list of certified election wins...
brooklynite
Feb 2024
#87