1. Historic Hearings Begin On Whether 14th Amendment Disqualifies Trump From Running For President

YUG News – Historic Hearings Begin On Whether 14th Amendment, A landmark five-day evidence hearing for a lawsuit brought against Trump by six Republican and independent voters in Colorado began on Monday morning in Denver. The watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) is representing the six voters.

This Thursday’s hearing in St. Paul, Minnesota, is scheduled to be similar.

Team CREW The reason his organization filed a lawsuit in Colorado, according to President Noah Bookbinder, is that “it is necessary to defend our republic both today and in the future.” In response to the group’s allegation, which he rejects, Trump is accused of encouraging and supporting the mob at the Capitol two years ago. Republicans in the Senate cleared him despite the fact that he was impeached on identical accusations.

The 14th Amendment provision that is being utilized against Trump has been rejected by him and his campaign. A spokesman earlier stated in a statement, “Those who are pursuing this ridiculous conspiracy theory and political attack on President Trump are stretching the law beyond recognition.”

Historic Hearings Begin On Whether 14th Amendment

2. Read more about regarding Historic Hearings Begin On Whether 14th Amendment Disqualifies Trump From Running For President

Representative Eric Swalwell of California was inside the Capitol that day, and CREW called two police officers who were present as witnesses during the hearing in Denver. The group intends to contact two academics as well.

“What happened in the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, was horrifying. Danny Hodges, one of the policemen, stated that “it was an attempt to prevent the peaceful transfer of power, an assault on democracy, and a terrorist attack on the United States of America.”

In his testimony, Swalwell talked about some of what he seen during the riots and his worries that Trump wouldn’t recognize the results of the 2020 presidential election. It was “war-like,” as he put it.

Swalwell was shown some of his previous social media postings encouraging people to “fight” for Democratic causes during Trump’s attorneys’ cross-examination. They also displayed Trump’s remarks from later on January 6 in which he did request a stop to the violence.

During the opening remarks, a CREW representative asserted that “Trump incited a violent crowd to harm our animals in order to obstruct the peaceful transition of power that is permitted by our Constitution…. We’re here because Trump maintains that he is entitled to run for president once more.”

During his opening remarks, Scott Gessler, the former secretary of state for Colorado and Trump’s lawyer, called the lawsuit “anti-democratic.”

According to Gessler, it appears to be an attempt to eliminate the chance for millions of Coloradans, Colorado Republicans, and unaffiliated voters to select and cast their ballots for the presidential candidate of their choice.

He said that in order to clarify the interpretation of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, two academics will be called as witnesses by Trump’s team. Along with calling the rally’s organizers on the morning of January 6, when Trump delivered a speech outside the White House, Gessler said they also intend to phone a different member of the House.

Historic Hearings Begin On Whether 14th Amendment.

3. He disagreed with the claim that Trump participated in the uprising.

According to Gessler, a significant portion of the evidence against Trump came from the work of the House special committee, which looked into the events of January 6 and issued a report detailing Trump’s actions before to the incident as well as a number of in-depth committee hearings.

In a few states, attempts have gained momentum in recent months to use Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which was initially passed during the Civil War, to prevent Trump from competing in the Republican primary.

other conservative legal professors have also backed the proposal, although other prominent Republican officials involved in elections, such as Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who has chastised Trump’s election rhetoric, have expressed skepticism about it.

Although there have been other state-level lawsuits filed, Colorado and Minnesota are seen to be the most prominent, and they have sparked the first significant hearings on the matter.

If a person took an oath to support the Constitution while in office and then “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or [gave] aid or comfort to the enemies thereof,” they are not eligible to run for office again, according to Section 3 of the amendment, unless they are granted amnesty by a two-thirds vote of Congress.

Proponents of this theory contend that Trump is covered by it due to his actions following his loss in the 2020 election, particularly his attempts to overturn the outcome on January 6, 2021. Prior attempts to target other Republicans had been unsuccessful, with the exception of New Mexico, where a county commissioner was removed from office after being found guilty of trespassing on January 6.

This Colorado hearing marks the first instance in which a presidential contender has been subjected to the restrictions of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Secretary of State Jena Griswold stated in an interview that she “looks forward to the court providing guidance, of course, to me in Colorado but to election officials across the nation as to whether Trump has disqualified himself for engaging in insurrection.”

Griswold, a Democrat, is included as a defendant in the 14th Amendment action due to her position and will certify Colorado’s presidential primary vote on January 5.

Despite her criticism of Trump’s behavior, she has not stated her opinion on his eligibility.

His lawyers have contested the lawsuit on a number of grounds, such as the fact that it is proceeding too quickly ahead of the state’s Republican primary in March and the application of anti-SLAPP laws, which hold that individuals shouldn’t be singled out for legal action simply for using their First Amendment rights, as Trump claims he did in contesting the results of the 2020 election.

Motions to dismiss have been denied by Democratic Governor Jared Polis’ appointment, Colorado District Judge Sarah Wallace.

Historic Hearings Begin On Whether 14th Amendment

4. Additionally, Trump’s staff attempted in vain (Historic Hearings Begin On Whether 14th Amendment)

Additionally, Trump’s staff attempted in vain to get the case transferred from state to federal court.

This week’s hearing will cover, among other things, the history and application of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, whether or not it is self-executing, whether or not it applies to presidents, the definitions of “engaged” and “insurrection” in the section, and the frequency and grounds for which the secretary of state rejects candidates due to constitutional flaws.

The several parties will next reappear in court on November 15 to make their final arguments. Wallace has said that she will make a decision in less than 48 hours.

According to his attorneys, Trump will not testify, even though no witness lists have been made public. Wallace has previously rejected a move to depose Trump in order to allow his testimony to be heard during the hearing.
But from the beginning of the hearing, he has been raising money.

Although Griswold is not providing evidence in the lawsuit, she has stated that she will cooperate if asked to testify and that she would be happy to address any legal queries on Colorado election law, their certification procedure, or any other matters.

Never before has a president attacked our democracy and incited an uprising like Donald Trump. And no president has ever chosen to do that before deciding to run for office again. Thus, Griswold stated, “My responsibility through all of this is to uphold the Constitution and the law.”

A comparable challenge, filed by Free Speech For People (FSFP), an organization that advocates for many state voters, including a former state secretary and a judge of the Minnesota Supreme Court, will be heard by the court on Thursday.
It will be decided during that hearing—which is anticipated to be less extensive than the multiday hearing in Denver—whether or not Trump is permitted to be on the Minnesota primary ballot.

FSFP’s legal director, Ron Fein, stated in an interview that his organization feels the former president is covered by Section 3 of the 14th Amendment since Trump violated his oath to the Constitution.

Citing Section 3, FSFP had unsuccessfully contested the candidacies of many Congressmen in 2022. In a well-known lawsuit against Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, the judge determined that the plaintiffs’ evidence was insufficient.

Fein said that their case against Trump is supported by “far stronger” evidence.
According to Simon, his office will take a stand on the case’s scheduling and timetable in order to provide voters a timely response before to the state’s primary on March 5. However, they will not be taking a position on the legal merits of the issue.

Simon projected that in the midst of the several state-level lawsuits challenging Trump’s eligibility, the U.S. Supreme Court will have to intervene to decide the matter in the event that any court finds merit in the Section 3 defense.

According to Simon, Donald Trump will either be on ballots everywhere or nowhere. The entire nation will be subject to a single rule.

5. Note :- FAQ – Historic Hearings Begin On Whether 14th Amendment Disqualifies Trump From Running For President

Q1: What is the nature of the lawsuit involving former President Trump and six voters in Colorado?

A: This lawsuit involves six Republican and independent voters in Colorado who are suing former President Trump. They are using the 14th Amendment to challenge his eligibility for public office.

Q2: Who is representing the six voters in this lawsuit?

A: The watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) is representing the six voters in this case.

Q3: Why did CREW file the lawsuit in Colorado?

A: According to President Noah Bookbinder of CREW, they filed the lawsuit in Colorado to defend the republic against actions they believe were detrimental, both in the present and the future. The lawsuit is based on allegations that Trump encouraged and supported the mob that attacked the Capitol two years ago.

Q4: How does the 14th Amendment play a role in this lawsuit? (Historic Hearings Begin On Whether 14th Amendment)

A: The 14th Amendment is being used to challenge Trump’s eligibility. It states that individuals who “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the [Constitution], or [gave] aid or comfort to the enemies thereof” are ineligible to run for office unless granted amnesty by a two-thirds vote of Congress.

Q5: What is the basis of the lawsuit against Trump? (Historic Hearings Begin On Whether 14th Amendment)

A: The lawsuit argues that Trump’s actions, particularly his attempts to overturn the 2020 election and the events on January 6, 2021, fall under the 14th Amendment’s provisions.

Q6: What action is the U.S. Ambassador to Japan suggesting in response to China’s ban on Japanese seafood?

A: The U.S. Ambassador to Japan suggests that Washington should consider putting sanctions on China in response to their actions, which he characterizes as “economic warfare.”

Q7: How did Representative Eric Swalwell contribute to the hearing in Denver?

A: Representative Eric Swalwell, who was present at the Capitol on January 6, provided testimony during the hearing. He described the events as “war-like” and discussed his concerns about Trump not recognizing the 2020 election results.

Q8: How does former Secretary of State for Colorado Scott Gessler characterize the lawsuit?

A: Scott Gessler, Trump’s lawyer, characterizes the lawsuit as “anti-democratic” and an attempt to hinder voters’ choices in the presidential primary.

Q9: What is the significance of the hearings in Colorado and Minnesota?

A: These hearings in Colorado and Minnesota are seen as the most prominent instances of legal action invoking the 14th Amendment to challenge a presidential contender’s eligibility.

Q10: When will a decision be made regarding Trump’s eligibility?

A: The parties involved will reappear in court on November 15 to make their final arguments, and the judge, Sarah Wallace, has stated that she will make a decision within 48 hours.

Q11: What role does Section 3 of the 14th Amendment play in the case against Trump?

A: Section 3 of the 14th Amendment is central to the case, as it outlines the conditions under which an individual may be disqualified from running for office. The lawsuit argues that Trump’s actions fall under this section.

Q12: How do supporters of the theory against Trump believe it will be resolved?

A: Supporters of the theory believe that the U.S. Supreme Court may need to intervene to resolve the matter if any court finds merit in the Section 3 defense.

Q13: What is the potential outcome regarding Trump’s eligibility, according to Secretary of State Jena Griswold?

A: Secretary of State Jena Griswold expects the court to provide guidance, not just to Colorado but to election officials across the nation, regarding whether Trump has disqualified himself for engaging in insurrection.

Q14: What will be determined in the hearing in Minnesota?

A: The hearing in Minnesota will determine whether Trump is permitted to be on the Minnesota primary ballot, based on the interpretation of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

Q15: What argument does Free Speech For People (FSFP) put forth in their challenge against Trump?

A: FSFP contends that Trump is covered by Section 3 of the 14th Amendment due to his alleged violation of his oath to the Constitution.

Q16: What is the role of Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon in this case?

A: Simon’s office will handle the scheduling and timetable of the case, providing a timely response before the state’s primary on March 5. However, they will not take a position on the legal merits of the issue.

Q17: What does Simon project regarding the involvement of the U.S. Supreme Court in this matter?

A: Simon believes that the U.S. Supreme Court may need to intervene to decide the matter if any court finds merit in the Section 3 defense, potentially affecting Trump’s presence on ballots across the nation.

Q18: What is the Disqualifies Trump From Running For President? (Historic Hearings Begin On Whether 14th Amendment)

A: A landmark five-day evidence hearing for a lawsuit brought against Trump by six Republican and independent voters in Colorado began on Monday morning in Denver. The watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) is representing the six voters. Read more ……………..Historic Hearings Begin On Whether 14th Amendment Disqualifies Trump From Running For President