Alysa Hutnik’s Post

This bill is basically Unconstitutional.

This morning, news broke that the U.S. Justice Department has informed tRUMP that he is a target of the criminal investigation into the January 6 insurrection and that another indictment is imminent. This would be tRUMP’s most serious indictment yet, effectively accusing him of a conspiracy to overthrow the government of the United States. However, by all indications, these charges will only strengthen tRUMP’s position in the Republican primary polls. And if tRUMP once again claims the Republican nomination, I truly fear for the future of our democracy. But there is good news: The 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution explicitly bans anyone who has engaged in insurrection from running for president or any other public office, and this indictment will make it even more clear that tRUMP is disqualified from holding office. The 14th Amendment, added to the Constitution after the Civil War, explicitly prohibits elected officials who’ve engaged in insurrection from serving in public office again. It’s been applied many times in the past. In fact, just last year a New Mexico judge removed a county commissioner who participated in the January 6 insurrection from his office and banned him from running again in the future. However, most Americans don’t know that, and the corporate media is still acting like the 14th Amendment doesn’t exist or is some fringe left-wing idea, rather than the law of the land. Meanwhile, Trump and his allies are pushing out lies that need to be debunked in real time.

Today marks the fourth Legislative session of this year, and that's not counting the Senate's sitting as a court of impeachment last month. Seems like a lot for a part-time Legislature. So what's the political calculation a Governor makes when calling a special session? It’s really not something we think about too much. We assume the Governor has the power to convene the Legislature, he uses it, and that’s it. A pretty one-dimensional exercise of power. But consider this. The Legislature is, by design, the most powerful branch of government. So when the Governor convenes the Legislature, he is activating a more powerful branch of government than his own. This, plus the back half of last week in review in yesterday's Regulated Discourse. -- Regulated Discourse is a free, twice-per-week newsletter distilling Texas policy and politics. Sign up for free here! https://lnkd.in/dGMGsEGp

Professor Sanders asserts "This Article argues that all forms of purposeful lawlessness, direct or indirect, forcible or peaceable, are protected under the Second Amendment. That is, the Second Amendment embraces its own version of the political necessity defense. The argument is simple. The Supreme Court held in District of Columbia v. Heller and reinforced in McDonald v. Chicago that the Second Amendment embraces a right to rebel against government tyranny and public violence. However, the Court did not provide a defense for vindicating this right. The traditional political necessity defense provides the best framework. Both the traditional political necessity defense and the Second Amendment were created to address government failures and the insufficient laws. The common law necessity defense reflected a fear that the newly formed federal and state governments might abuse their powers and reflected a concern that governments would not keep pace with popular values or “fundamental changes in public morality.” The necessity defense empowered juries to address these concerns on a case-by-case basis. The traditional political necessity defense more directly reflects the founding fears of government overreach. The political necessity defense absolves an individual for breaking the law as a last resort when the effect of the law or government action is more harmful than breaking the law. Similarly, the Second Amendment right to bear arms was enacted, in large part, as a check on government's legislative and executive powers. The Framers reasoned that an armed citizenry would prevent government tyranny in the first instance and, if unsuccessful, would provide a vehicle for overturning it. The act of overturning or preventing government tyranny is literally a matter of political necessity."

KEY POINTS: (1) Trump and his right-wing allies seek authoritarian control of U.S. government — and the weakening of law enforcement agencies; (2) Trump and his associates have a broader goal: to alter the balance of power by increasing the president’s authority. KEY EXCERPT: Donald J. Trump and his allies are planning a sweeping expansion of presidential power over the machinery of government if voters return him to the White House in 2025, reshaping the structure of the executive branch to concentrate far greater authority directly in his hands. Their plans to centralize more power in the Oval Office stretch far beyond the former president’s recent remarks that he would order a criminal investigation into his political rival, President Biden, signaling his intent to end the post-Watergate norm of Justice Department independence from White House political control. Mr. Trump and his associates have a broader goal: to alter the balance of power by increasing the president’s authority over every part of the federal government that now operates, by either law or tradition, with any measure of independence from political interference by the White House, according to a review of his campaign policy proposals and interviews with people close to him. The New York Times