292
submitted 7 months ago by girlfreddy@lemmy.ca to c/news@lemmy.world

The Supreme Court on Monday rejected an appeal from a former New Mexico county commissioner who was kicked out of office over his participation in the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.

Former Otero County commissioner Couy Griffin, a cowboy pastor who rode to national political fame by embracing then-President Donald Trump with a series of horseback caravans, is the only elected official thus far to be banned from office in connection with the Capitol attack, which disrupted Congress as it was trying to certify Joe Biden’s 2020 electoral victory over Trump.

At a 2022 trial in state district court, Griffin received the first disqualification from office in over a century under a provision of the 14th Amendment written to prevent former Confederates from serving in government after the Civil War.

Though the Supreme Court ruled this month that states don’t have the ability to bar Trump or other candidates for federal offices from the ballot, the justices said different rules apply to state and local candidates.

all 36 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 79 points 7 months ago

Griffin received the first disqualification from office in over a century under a provision of the 14th Amendment written to prevent former Confederates from serving in government after the Civil War.

And yet Trump is eligible to run for office because...?

[-] elrik@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago

.. because we live in one of the worst timelines.

[-] mp3@lemmy.ca 4 points 7 months ago

Couy was found guilty of trespassing, while Trump is only facing charges, no verdict yet.

[-] dudinax@programming.dev 3 points 7 months ago

trespassing isn't insurgency

[-] mp3@lemmy.ca 3 points 7 months ago

My point is that he's not found guilty of that yet.

[-] dudinax@programming.dev 1 points 7 months ago

My point is that we can infer he participated in the insurgency without his direct conviction for insurgency. The trespassing conviction is strong enough evidence to make the inference.

But Trump's role was public and undeniable. No inference is needed. His participation was directly observed by anyone old enough to make a judgement.

[-] lingh0e@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 months ago

Surely you know this by now, a verdict is not required to invoke the ammendment.

[-] mp3@lemmy.ca 2 points 7 months ago

Sadly it seems the Supreme Court thinks otherwise for presidential candidates.

[-] Dkarma@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

Sadly this is why the supreme court is ILLEGITIMATE!

[-] BigBlackCoffee@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 7 months ago

Not from the US, so I could easily be wrong. My understanding is that due process still applies as per the 5th amendment. It would need to be shown beyond a reasonable doubt that he played a role in the insurrection and charged federally.

Section 3 would then be self-executing (I.e. with immediate effect), unless this disability to hold office was removed as outlined in that section. Of course, this presumes a sensible interpretation of the wording used, and not what SCOTUS added - unnecessarily requiring congress to act to both instate and remove the disability to hold office.

[-] Dkarma@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

It didn't apply the last time we barred ppl from office.

[-] PunnyName@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

"chosen one" or some other bullshit

[-] newtraditionalists@kbin.social -4 points 7 months ago

If states could remove candidates from federal elections, there would never be a Democrat on a federal ballot in a red state ever again. Literally, never again. It's frustrating, but I actually think the court made a good call here.

[-] Dkarma@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago

Elaborate. How will the GOP present actual proof when Dems haven't ever done an insurrection?

Go.

[-] The_Lopen@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 months ago

First, have they ever presented good evidence of anything?

Second, who would they present it to? There's no governmental agency or regulatory body in charge of disqualifying for insurrection. The only precedent we have for this is Confederates trying to run for office after the civil war, but that precedent got botched.

10/10 condescending attitude tho

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

Which then destroys any legitimacy the GOP has and those states results can be discarded during certification. Which, ironically is what Trump wanted to have happen on January 6th.

States can, right now, just suspend elections and have the legislature or governor appoint people. But you don't see that happening for the same reason you wouldn't see red states ban every democratic candidate.

[-] nkat2112@sh.itjust.works 18 points 7 months ago

Griffin received the first disqualification from office in over a century under a provision of the 14th Amendment...

What a major accomplishment. He should be so proud. /s

[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 7 months ago

Cowboys are my natural enemies. Everything else aside, just wearing that hat is enough for me to dislike you.

this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2024
292 points (97.4% liked)

News

23266 readers
3906 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS