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: Neal Katyal noting that SCOTUS did not clear Trump of insurrection as he requested [View all]Fiendish Thingy
(24,276 posts)33. In 1866, There was an enforcement act that was later repealed.
Congress passed legislation granting the states the authority to implement section 3 of the 14th amendment, specifically against former members of the confederacy, and the legislation contained the guidelines for doing so.
At some point, I believe in the 1870s that enforcement act was repealed, and since then only two people have been disqualified under the 14th- one last year for a county commissioner position, and one in the 1920s for congress. The latter disqualification was reversed when the individuals conviction was overturned, and he ran for and served in congress.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
38 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
Neal Katyal noting that SCOTUS did not clear Trump of insurrection as he requested [View all]
Kennah
Mar 2024
OP
Bur they were unanimous in keeping the rapist, traitor on the ballot anyway.
FalloutShelter
Mar 2024
#1
I can only give an example of what I imagine the law could look like, not predict what it would actually be
Fiendish Thingy
Mar 2024
#22
The SCOTUS ruled that only Congress could enable Section 3 of the 13th., as was done back in
sinkingfeeling
Mar 2024
#13
Their ruling argued that Constitution only allows congress to address that matter, and while
Texin
Mar 2024
#32
Thanks. Actually it was a good decision in that think IF yes, Abortion laws to could apply to ALL States, but
riversedge
Mar 2024
#11
Except Colorado was not ruling for the entire nation, but just for the election being held in Colorado
Dave says
Mar 2024
#36
If states ran things independently they could set their own election days.
former9thward
Mar 2024
#4
He hasn't been convicted of rape or insurrection. Let him run. And we'd better bring out a huge turnout.
marble falls
Mar 2024
#7
He may have requested that but that was not the issue the Court considered.
former9thward
Mar 2024
#2
Unless it is the Immunity question where it is not narrow, but wide open (will take longer/more delay)
Nictuku
Mar 2024
#10
Screw the SCOTUS, we gotta keep him and as many repukes as possible out of office in Nov.
Cheezoholic
Mar 2024
#27
It seems the only practical decision for elections for national office, but
bucolic_frolic
Mar 2024
#29