Tag: 14th Amendment

Commentary: Dems Rebut 2020 Rigging Accusations by Rigging 2024

Arizona Sun Times Staff

The people most insistent on the purity of the 2020 election work feverishly on rigging the 2024 election. It makes one wonder.

This anti-democratic effort includes interpreting the suffrage-expanding 14th Amendment to deny suffrage to Donald Trump’s supporters in 2024. A Washington, D.C.–based group, for instance, sued in Colorado this week to prevent the name of the candidate favored by most Republicans from appearing on the ballot there. If the involvement of an out-of-state group did not serve as a clue, then its board comprising partisan Democrats — and a “Republican” who endorsed Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Joe Biden for president — signaled the politics-by-other-means purpose of the motley crew. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington President Noah Bookbinder justified preventing the opposition’s preferred candidate from appearing on the ballot by maintaining that “it is necessary to defend our republic both today and in the future.”

Read More

Top Democrats Back ‘Dangerous’ Legal Theory to Block Americans from Voting for Trump

Arizona Sun Times Staff

Two top Democrats backed on Sunday the theory that former President Donald Trump could be disqualified from running under the 14th Amendment, Axios reported.

Democratic Representative Adam Schiff of California and Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia backed the idea that Trump could be blocked from the 2024 ballot under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which maintains that anyone who “engaged in insurrection” cannot hold elected office, according to Axios. Free Speech For People, a Democratic-aligned group, also sent letters to secretaries of state in key 2024 states last week claiming Trump should be removed from the ballot.

Read More

Far-Left Groups Seek to Use 14th Amendment to Block Trump from 2024 Ballot

Arizona Sun Times Staff

Several far-left groups have begun claiming, with little to no evidence, that they can legally exclude former President Donald Trump from the ballot in 2024 by using the Constitution’s “insurrection clause.”

According to the Associated Press, such advocates point to the 14th Amendment, which bars anyone from office if they “engaged” in “insurrection or rebellion” against the government. This clause, added to the Constitution following the Civil War, has been cited by progressives who believe that the peaceful protests at the U.S. Capitol on January 6th, 2021 were an example of “insurrection” allegedly caused by President Trump.

Read More

Alan Dershowitz Commentary: No; The 14th Amendment Can’t Disqualify Trump

Arizona Sun Times Staff

Several academics — including members of the conservative Federalist Society — are now arguing that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment prohibits Donald Trump from becoming president. They focus on the language that prohibits anyone who “shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion…or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof” from holding “any office.” The amendment provides no mechanism for determining whether a candidate falls within this disqualification, though it says that “Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each house, remove such disability.” Significantly, the text does not authorize Congress — or any other body or individual — to impose the disqualification in the first place.

Read More

Commentary: Can Texas Restore Nondiscrimination and Equal Opportunity to Higher Education?

Admin

Americans once said, “As California goes, so goes the nation.” Hopefully after this legislative session, Americans will say, “As Texas goes, so goes the nation.”

The Lone Star State’s leaders are fighting fiercely right now to restore non-discrimination and equal rights under the law. These are American values embedded in U.S. civil rights laws and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, but they’re no longer practiced—or enforced.

Read More

Legal Insurrection’s ‘Equal Protection Project’ Launches to Defend Americans Against Biden’s ‘Equity Discrimination’

Susan Berry, PhD

President Joe Biden issued a sweeping executive order last week that will embed woke critical race and gender ideologies into every agency of the federal government, an agenda Legal Insurrection’s Professor William Jacobson asserts amounts to “outright discrimination on the basis of race.”

Jacobson announced the launch of the Equal Protection Project Thursday night on Fox News’ Tucker Carlson Tonight.

Read More

Commentary: Court’s Legitimacy Depends on Overturning Roe v. Wade

RealClearWire

When the U.S. Supreme Court takes up Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization today, it will be asked to overrule Roe v. Wade, the court’s 50-year-old precedent that created a constitutional right to abortion.  Legions of commentators are turning out to defend Roe, claiming that the Supreme Court’s legitimacy depends on reaffirming it.  They are wrong.

The majority’s opinion in Roe has undermined the court’s legitimacy for nearly a half-century. Roe relied on dubious reasoning to remove a contentious policy issue from the reach of the American people, placing all abortion policy in the hands of the unelected and unaccountable judiciary. As a result, Roe has politicized the court and poisoned the judiciary. The most legitimate thing the Supreme Court can do is overrule Roe.

Read More

In the Face of Cancel Culture, Princeton Professor Offers Course on Lincoln’s Legacy

Arizona Sun Times Staff

While schools like the University of Wisconsin Madison have considered canceling President Abraham Lincoln, one Princeton professor wants to preserve his legacy and help students learn more about the nation’s 16th president.

The Ivy League university will offer a course called “Abraham Lincoln’s Politics: Concepts, Conflict and Context” this semester taught by Professor Allen Guelzo, a Civil War historian and author. He also serves on the board of the Abraham Lincoln Association.

Read More

Commentary: The Case for the Unconstitutionality of Abortion

Arizona Sun Times Staff

In the April issue of the conservative journal First Things, the esteemed natural law philosopher John Finnis wrote an essay titled “Abortion Is Unconstitutional.” Finnis’ basic argument was that the traditional conservative or originalist stance on abortion and the Supreme Court’s infamous 1973 Roe v. Wade decision—namely, that the Constitution is “silent” on the matter and that it is properly an issue for states to decide among themselves—is both morally insufficient and legally dubious.

According to Finnis, unborn children are properly understood as “persons” under the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause, and state-level homicide laws, therefore, cannot discriminate by protecting live people but not unborn people. The upshot under this logic is that overturning Roe and its 1992 successor, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, would not merely return abortion regulation to the ambits of the various states, as earlier conservative legal titans such as the late Justice Antonin Scalia long argued. Rather, it would mandate banning the bloody practice nationwide.

Read More

Commentary: Why Are Defense Department Schools Transitioning Students’ Gender Behind Parents’ Backs?

Arizona Sun Times Staff
DODEA Schools Transgenderism

Our men and women in uniform are prepared to lay their lives on the line every day to uphold the Constitution and protect the nation from enemies who would do us harm, but what many service members may not realize is that a personal threat to their families exists much closer to home.

As parental outrage with “progressive” curriculums—for example, comprehensive sex education, gender identity, and “anti-racist” programs—sweeps across the country, military parents have good reasons to be up in arms.

Read More