Kismet wrote: ↑Wed Mar 06, 2024 4:21 pm
SCOTUS said NADA about convictions and the facts of the case that the lower courts used to disqualify Orange Fatso.
They DID say that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment is NOT self-executing and that Congress has to pass legislation to use Section 3 to disqualify an insurrectionist from a ballot. .
This Salty. ^^^
And I'm not the attorney here, but if I understand the logic, the issue of what constitutes an "insurrection" the Court may also be saying, or would say, is in Congress' purview and would need explicit action pertaining to Jan 6. Ain't gonna happen.
Under that logic, nothing is an "insurrection" until Congress explicitly says so. And Congress did say so about the secessionists in the Civil War. But not beyond...yet... by that SCOTUS logic they would need to do so again.
Or at least that would be the defense position all the way to appeal to SCOTUS.
But that's not a problem for the charges Smith did bring:
Conspiracy to defraud the United States
Witness tampering
Conspiracy against the rights of citizens, and
Obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding.
There have never been any further prosecutions under 2383 since those arising from the Civil War, though there have been other attacks that might have qualified had Congress declared such. Instead prosecutors have successfully charged things like seditious conspiracy which are actually a higher charge carrying 20 years of jail time rather than 10. Proving that level of conspiracy is a very high bar of course.
Smith appears to be satisfied that he can prove what he has charged and doesn't need more to put Trump away for the rest of his life.