This is the best idea I've seen for effectively challenging in court Trump's misanthropy and mayhem. There are other potential plaintiffs with standing other than members of Congress - for example, any state. The many coattails of this kind of lawsuit are immense and have considerable political and publicity power. The case would stir intense furor on the right causing missteps by them and exposing their hypocrisy. Because I'm retired from law practice, I can't serve as counsel, but I would be more than happy to volunteer as an assistant for writing, researching, brainstorming, gathering evidence and whatever an attorney needs in order to pursue this. I'm also sending this to the A.G. of my state, Washington, who is not shy about taking on worthy causes.
Thank you for telling the truth. I am wondering if anyone has contacted the most excellent Attorney General from California, Vice President Kamala Harris has prosecuted organized crime syndicates and cartels very successfully and her experience in the White House and ability to be honest and transparent and humble are the qualities that we need for this TEAM. I might be able to help somehow too. I’m down for whatever I can do to contribute and defend our Constitution from both foreign and domestic threats.
Anyone or any organization who can show tangible injury capable of remedy by judicial action has standing to sue an appropriate governmental defendant for a constitutional violation. However, there are a number of difficult procedural and immunity hurdles that must be satisfied before an action for a constitutional violation can succeed. Members of Congress, for example, generally must show that the violation impeded their ability to carry out their duties. The full answer to your question varies depending on the facts, the injury, the type of relief sought, the type of violation, and other circumstances in each particular case.
Another example where there could be a way to raise this: the RIF (firings) of federal employees can be challenged in several ways. One of which is if the person/agency lacks the power to fire. The person who appointed the people doing the firing is illegally occupying the position and therefore the actions are voidable. There is an exception to the defacto officer doctrine essentially when the public is already aware of the person's disputed eligibility to hold the office.
Of course, SCOTUS will create an escape hatch for Trump out of whole cloth (again), but it would be a worthy exercise to put every decision maker in the chain on the spot to make a call on this historic issue.
Do I have permission to repost, send or duplicate this? This seems to be a better way than just screaming, “Impeach the Mad King of Orange!” How can I help to clog every representative’s fax and email with this request to file. Add this to Jack Smith’s upcoming public testimony.
A couple of notes under "relief", Trump v Anderson already decided that section 3 DOES apply to the president, and is operative. so there is no need to re-establish that.
Also, among those who were convicted (not just arrested), were people guilty of Seditious Conspiracy, and several of his attorneys also pleaded guilty to it at the Georgia trial. So no need to prove insurrectionary conduct.
Also, several of them said under oath at their criminal trials that they did it for Trump.
Trump knew this when he not only praised their conduct but also pardoned them.
See Alter v. Trump, 25-5280, DC Circuit Court of Appeals. This is before the court RIGHT NOW, one level below the Supreme Court. Anyway, just waiting on whether the court will decide to reach the merits.
Congressmen would have trouble with the Separation of Powers unless they bring it as citizens. But I've already done that? But I agree, people who know better should have tried harder.
Is it best to print this out and mail the hard copy so a person has to actually take time to open it? I've heard phone calls are better than emails because they take up more time to answer.
While I admire the attempt at finding a route to remove Trump, it appears that the legal arguments are against this approach because of the timing of when the "aid and comfort" is delivered. Because the pardons occurred well after the actual insurrection itself, they are not considered to be the subject of Section 3. To overcome the legal impediment around Section 3, it will be necessary to show/prove that Trump was involved with planning and carrying out the insurrection. Any evidence showing financial support, planning/coordination efforts, promises of pardon's if/when he was to be elected, would certainly meet the test in my opinion. Also, the CTTE letter attributes the drafting of the complaint to a member of Congress but does not reveal who the author is. Does anybody know who we are talking about here, and of course, does anybody have a line on reports that can be used as evidence to show Trump's involvement at the time leading up to or during the insurrection? I'd really like to drop this on my rep's desk, but I want solid support. Thanks!
This is the best idea I've seen for effectively challenging in court Trump's misanthropy and mayhem. There are other potential plaintiffs with standing other than members of Congress - for example, any state. The many coattails of this kind of lawsuit are immense and have considerable political and publicity power. The case would stir intense furor on the right causing missteps by them and exposing their hypocrisy. Because I'm retired from law practice, I can't serve as counsel, but I would be more than happy to volunteer as an assistant for writing, researching, brainstorming, gathering evidence and whatever an attorney needs in order to pursue this. I'm also sending this to the A.G. of my state, Washington, who is not shy about taking on worthy causes.
Can we talk? Please send us a message on Substack
Thank you for telling the truth. I am wondering if anyone has contacted the most excellent Attorney General from California, Vice President Kamala Harris has prosecuted organized crime syndicates and cartels very successfully and her experience in the White House and ability to be honest and transparent and humble are the qualities that we need for this TEAM. I might be able to help somehow too. I’m down for whatever I can do to contribute and defend our Constitution from both foreign and domestic threats.
sharing with my reps
Does it have to be an MC? Who else has standing to sue?
Anyone or any organization who can show tangible injury capable of remedy by judicial action has standing to sue an appropriate governmental defendant for a constitutional violation. However, there are a number of difficult procedural and immunity hurdles that must be satisfied before an action for a constitutional violation can succeed. Members of Congress, for example, generally must show that the violation impeded their ability to carry out their duties. The full answer to your question varies depending on the facts, the injury, the type of relief sought, the type of violation, and other circumstances in each particular case.
Let's talk.
Please remind them to provide document filling in Liddle Marco’s requisite Times New Roman, 12-point font or it won’t count.
Absolutely. Apparently, formatting counts.
Can you give more context? Why now?
Another example where there could be a way to raise this: the RIF (firings) of federal employees can be challenged in several ways. One of which is if the person/agency lacks the power to fire. The person who appointed the people doing the firing is illegally occupying the position and therefore the actions are voidable. There is an exception to the defacto officer doctrine essentially when the public is already aware of the person's disputed eligibility to hold the office.
Of course, SCOTUS will create an escape hatch for Trump out of whole cloth (again), but it would be a worthy exercise to put every decision maker in the chain on the spot to make a call on this historic issue.
Do I have permission to repost, send or duplicate this? This seems to be a better way than just screaming, “Impeach the Mad King of Orange!” How can I help to clog every representative’s fax and email with this request to file. Add this to Jack Smith’s upcoming public testimony.
A couple of notes under "relief", Trump v Anderson already decided that section 3 DOES apply to the president, and is operative. so there is no need to re-establish that.
Also, among those who were convicted (not just arrested), were people guilty of Seditious Conspiracy, and several of his attorneys also pleaded guilty to it at the Georgia trial. So no need to prove insurrectionary conduct.
Also, several of them said under oath at their criminal trials that they did it for Trump.
Trump knew this when he not only praised their conduct but also pardoned them.
See Alter v. Trump, 25-5280, DC Circuit Court of Appeals. This is before the court RIGHT NOW, one level below the Supreme Court. Anyway, just waiting on whether the court will decide to reach the merits.
Congressmen would have trouble with the Separation of Powers unless they bring it as citizens. But I've already done that? But I agree, people who know better should have tried harder.
Is it best to print this out and mail the hard copy so a person has to actually take time to open it? I've heard phone calls are better than emails because they take up more time to answer.
While I admire the attempt at finding a route to remove Trump, it appears that the legal arguments are against this approach because of the timing of when the "aid and comfort" is delivered. Because the pardons occurred well after the actual insurrection itself, they are not considered to be the subject of Section 3. To overcome the legal impediment around Section 3, it will be necessary to show/prove that Trump was involved with planning and carrying out the insurrection. Any evidence showing financial support, planning/coordination efforts, promises of pardon's if/when he was to be elected, would certainly meet the test in my opinion. Also, the CTTE letter attributes the drafting of the complaint to a member of Congress but does not reveal who the author is. Does anybody know who we are talking about here, and of course, does anybody have a line on reports that can be used as evidence to show Trump's involvement at the time leading up to or during the insurrection? I'd really like to drop this on my rep's desk, but I want solid support. Thanks!
We need to copy & send to our reps & others. this is good. I'll send
Hell yes! Do it.