• Chainweasel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I wonder what their definition of “support” is and how they plan on using that as a defense.

    • vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Or what their definition of “defend” is, and how they plan to use that as support.

    • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Looks like the founding fathers fucked up, and the writers of the 14th amendment didn’t catch it.

      The oaths of office for the Senate, House of Representatives, Supreme Court, and all civil and military offices except the presidency include the requirement to “support” the constitution. Even the vice presidency requires it, but the presidency does not.

      I don’t think this distinction is particularly relevant. I don’t think the “previously swore an oath” requirement is particularly relevant. The “insurrection” part should disqualify him, and the Colorado judge ruled that he did, in fact, commit insurrection.

      I am curious whether he ever made a campaign speech or other public statement about the constitution, and used the word “support”.