Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) said the quiet part out loud in a recently surfaced video, suggesting that Democrats in Congress might move to bl...
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) said the quiet part out loud in a recently surfaced video, suggesting that Democrats in Congress might move to block the results of the 2024 presidential election if former President Donald Trump were to win.
Raskin cited the Supreme Court’s March decision — a unanimous ruling that barred states from removing Trump from the ballot — and argued that because the Court had not acted to declare Trump ineligible to be president, Congress would have to do so on January 6 in the event that Trump won re-election in November.
“Even if voters unquestionably elect Donald Trump as President, no matter the margin, and even if the election is universally accepted as free and fair, top Democrats are calling on Congress to block certification of the results, and prep for civil war,” former Rep. Lee Zelda (R-NY) posted along with the video.
WATCH:
“What can be put into the Constitution can slip away from you very quickly,” Raskin said, making it clear he blamed the Supreme Court for that. “And the greatest example going on right now before our very eyes is Section III of the 14th Amendment which they’re just disappearing with a magic wand as if it doesn’t exist even though it could not be clearer what it’s stating.”
“And so they want to kick it to Congress, so it’s going to be up to us on January 6th, 2025, to tell the rampaging Trump mobs that he’s disqualified,” Raskin added with a smile. “And then we need bodyguards for everybody and civil war conditions all because the nine justices, not all of them, but these justices who have, not many cases to look at every year, not that much work to do, a huge staff, great protection, simply do not want to do their job and interpret what the great 14th Amendment means.”
Red State’s Bonchie responded to the clip, saying, “Holy crap, this is as advertised. Raskin says Congress will have to tell Trump on January 6th, 2025 that he’s ‘disqualified’ and that it’ll put the country on a civil war footing. He’s advertising plans to steal the election right out in the open.”
“I believe this is called a criminal conspiracy to commit election interference,” Trump senior adviser Stephen Miller added.
The Supreme Court did, as Raskin stated, leave the issue to Congress — but the ruling, according to ScotusBlog, also noted that Congress would have to first pass “appropriate legislation” that would allow enforcement of the 14th Amendment. Congress would also have to determine that the person in question was actually guilty of insurrection in order to enforce Section 3 — and Congress, led by Raskin himself, ostensibly already tried and failed to do just that when they impeached Trump the second time.
But before disqualifying someone under Section 3, the justices observed, there must be a determination that the provision actually applies to that person. And Section 5 of the 14th Amendment gives the power to make that determination to Congress, by authorizing it to pass “appropriate legislation” to “enforce” the 14th Amendment. Nothing in the 14th Amendment, the court stressed, gives states the power to enforce Section 3 against candidates for federal office, nor was there any history of states doing so in the years after the amendment was ratified.
No comments