Definition of ‘Insurrection’ at core of outcome
The lawsuit suggests that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment – which says that anyone who took an oath to support the Constitution but then “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against it cannot hold office – disqualifies Trump from becoming president again. The Civil War-era clause, which was ratified in 1868, was intended to prevent Confederate officials from holding elected office. The legal argument has rarely been used since the Reconstruction era following the war and has never been used to disqualify a presidential candidate. A New Mexico official was ordered removed from office last year over his participation in the Capitol attack, bolstering proponents’ argument that the same rules should apply to Trump. However, the argument was unsuccessfully used against Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) last year. Olson, the plaintiffs’ lawyer, argued that the Colorado case has four basic components: Trump took an oath as an officer of the U.S. The Capitol attack was an insurrection. 8220;And frankly, they’re asking this court to be the first in the country ever to embrace a number of legal theories that have never been accepted by a state court.”
Congressman takes the stand
made the rare move of taking the witness stand as a sitting lawmaker. He testified to his experience at the Capitol on Jan. 6, recalling the harrowing timeline of the day that ended in lawmakers evacuating the House and Senate chambers. Martha Tierney, an attorney for the plaintiffs in the case, asked Swalwell whether he was monitoring Trump’s tweets as the day evolved. He said he was. “We connected the president’s tweets to our own safety in the chamber and also the integrity of the proceedings taking place,” Swalwell said. During Swalwell’s cross-examination, an attorney for Trump questioned Swalwell over a personal injury lawsuit he filed against Trump, arguing that the California lawmaker could benefit by an outcome against the former president in this case. Swalwell demurred in response. Trump’s attorney also turned Swalwell’s own tweets against him, suggesting his own fiery language was not intended to actually inspire violence – and neither was Trump’s. In a May 2022 tweet, Swalwell said “we have to fight like our lives depend on it,” referring to abortion rights. “You were not advocating violence?” “I was not,” Swalwell said.
Trial at judge’s sole discretion
Colorado Judge Sarah Wallace is overseeing the bench trial, meaning she will be the sole decider of the case’s outcome, not a jury. At the start of the trial Monday morning, Wallace denied Trump’s motion to recuse herself from the case, which cited a donation the judge made to the Colorado Turnout Project, a PAC focused on electing Democrats across the state. “I apparently made a $100 contribution to the Colorado Turnout Project.
DC law enforcement, extremism experts testify
8220;It was a chant.” During Hodges’s cross-examination, Trump’s legal team argued that the officer could not have known which rioters had directly been influenced by Trump’s tweets or speech earlier that day. Another member of law enforcement, Capitol Police Officer Winston Pingeon, testified that he believed his life was in “imminent danger” that day. Experts in political extremism are expected to testify later this week.
Trump faces similar lawsuits in Michigan and Minnesota, but the Colorado case is the first to head to trial. The petition filed with the Minnesota Supreme Court similarly suggests that Trump’s role in the Capitol attack disqualifies him from public office. Among the petitioners is former Minnesota Secretary of State Joan Growe (D). Oral arguments in that case are scheduled for Thursday. A Michigan lawsuit makes the same argument.
Comments
Post a Comment