Section 3 of the 14th Amendment prevented the Confederates, who rebelled against the federal government during the Civil War, from holding public office.

Jan 24, 2024 · Wouldn't that mean the amendment cannot be applied to the defedant. 14th Amendment section 3. So, where I'm left wondering is how does this amendment hold any water or does it and does it allow the government to call anyone an insurrectionist to remove unfavorables from running for presidency. I'm just a curious on the whole situation.

Sep 2, 2023 · Section 3 of the 14th Amendment is stated as the cause for the suit, but the actual question in the petition is purely about standing under Article III. Aside from the extreme rarity of the Supreme Court accepting a petition in advance of an appeals court ruling, this might not be the case that the court would want to issue such a broad ...

Nov 21, 2023 · Section 4 allows the US federal government to accumulate debt, and Section 5 allows Congress to make laws that enforce the 14th Amendment. The 14th Amendment was one of three major amendments ...

Aug 28, 2023 · The wording is very similar to the 14th amendment wording -- what is the current state of court decisions and law dealing with how the Article III stipulations should be dealt with, if there's a question whether the person qualifies or not (i.e. Obama or John McCain)

The 14th Amendment, adopted July 9, 1868, tried to address many of the questions that remained following the end of the Civil War. Section 3 is one way that former Confederates were addressed. Answer and Explanation:

Dec 31, 2023 · Section 3 absolutely supercedes the First Amendment and all other Constitutional language passed prior to 9 July 1868, that's how the amendment process works. A strict reading of it would bar anyone who has engaged in an overt act of insurrection, such as using communication services to make a social media post calling for a socialist ...

That case focused mainly on Article 1 qualifications (age, residency, etc) but in a footnote said that 14th Amendment, Section 3 probably counts as a qualification too. But if exclusions are judicially reviewable, we might see the federal courts take a stricter view of what type of evidence is required to prove a Section 3 disability than ...

The answer would be judicial review: Although no justice mentioned this response, nobody should doubt that a state court’s determination of a federal constitutional question—such as Colorado’s that the former president had “engaged in an insurrection or rebellion” against the U.S. Constitution—is subject to review by the Supreme Court.

Mar 5, 2024 · It doesn't make much sense to me why Section 5 would require enabling legislation for Section 3 and Section 3 alone, so I think this reading is... fair. But, frankly, this ruling is a case where the Court was looking backward from the outcome it wanted. They're trying to close the door on certain less-than-ideal outcomes occurring on Jan 6th, 2025.