Appeals Court Rules That ‘Insurrectionist’ Members of Congress May Be Banned


The Federal Courts are anxious to intrude into elections these days. Not content in muddying the election process in Pennsylvania after ruling three days after the election and in the midst of counting ballots that unsigned ballots must be counted. Now the US 4th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a lower court decision and ruled the “insurrectionist’ members of congress may be barred from office.

A three-judge panel on the appeals court made the decision in a lawsuit against GOP North Carolina Congressman Madison Cawthorn. Although Cawthorn lost a tight primary race in North Carolina the question is what impact it will have on other races. It could set a precedent for lawsuits against GOP lawmakers in other states.

Tuesday’s appeals court ruling legally binds only the states in the 4th circuit: Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina – however

The Democrats are trying to block Arizona Reps. Gosar and Biggs from running for re-election. And of course, Marjorie Taylor Greene who just won her primary.File:New York appeals court building on Madison Avenue.jpg

Back in Pennsylvania,

As reported by Bunkerville:

Federal Appeals Court Steps into PA Election Count, Overrules State Courts

UPDATE: David McCormick has filed a court challenge to have the unsigned ballots counted. The GOP has filed on behalf of Oz that they should not be counted, based on the fact the Federal Courts should not have ruled on a State election, particularly one that is already in the process of being counted.  It is expected that the State Board of Elections will be making a statement today. Less than a thousand votes separate the candidates.

UPDATE II May 25 4:09

The interim Secretary of State has ordered a recount with ballots under litigation kept separate.

Now we learn that the Federal courts steps into the midst of the counting of ballots with a ruling.

The ruling could open a new fight immediately, as David McCormick and Mehmet Oz head toward a recount.

Pennsylvania mail ballots submitted without a date on the envelope last year should be counted, a federal appeals court said Friday, a ruling that could mean thousands more votes get counted in elections moving forward — starting with this past Tuesday’s primary.

Keep reading

The best of the swamp today.

For the best in conservative news aggregation push the button

36 Responses to “Appeals Court Rules That ‘Insurrectionist’ Members of Congress May Be Banned”

  1. Mike Gilmer Says:

    The 4th Circus is just as liberal as the 9th Circus thanks to eight years of Obama.

    Like

  2. Mic J Palazzolo Says:

    For the last fifty years, agenda-driven pareidolia regarding the 14th amendment was and is the go-to “ruling” from the deep state owned and operated state and federal judiciary. Their favorite amendment.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. Layla Elizabeth Kanas-Gonzalez Says:

    Sadly our judicial system is crumbling as is our government. I do not trust either party or SCOTUS. With lopsided rulings, the House and Senate acting like rabid dogs. It is appalling that grown adults behave this way and then we ask why is our youth so disgruntled, confused, and violent. Perhaps they all need to take a darn hard look at themselves. A bunch of pius hypocrites. No justice will not be served. The only thing being served are lies on a silver platter that needs a whole lot of cleaning! Sick of this darn mess~period!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Baysider Says:

      I remember a bible teacher many years ago (mid-60’s) commenting about the debauchery in official Washington. All the parties, booze and heads turned by $$$. It’s amazing how many good men there have been given the rot at the top. That’s a powerful storm surge in pushing people off the right path. Yes, appalling behavior. But your modifier is more accurate than your noun!

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Baysider Says:

    Under this ruling it will be easy to kick a number of people out of congress. I can already think of arguments for Waters, Cortez, Talib, Pelosi and a few others. Does violating your oath to protect / abide by the constitution count? Now we’ve got a LONG list. Let’s start on the judges. After cleaning out the White House.

    Liked by 3 people

    • peter3nj Says:

      Bayside:
      Surely you know the POS democrats have special dispensations from the government, corporate america, the elites, academia and the media and from hell below to do as they please. They will never answer for their unforgivable sins.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Baysider Says:

        Agree to sentence no. 1. I do believe they will have to answer for unforgiven sins, though. It’s possible we’ll all be in the audience to see it. I’m more concerned about getting me straight than to gloat in anticipation of that day.

        Liked by 1 person

  5. lgbmiel Says:

    Due process.

    You have to be convicted, not just accused of ‘insurrection.’

    On the ballot thing…I’m beyond tired of people not following the known rules and then whining about it!!!

    Liked by 3 people

    • bunkerville Says:

      And there lies the rub….. I am quickly losing faith in the judicial system. A jury of ones peers? How about the judges. And how many of these people have the deep pockets or willingness to go through tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees? And the mud and threats?

      Liked by 2 people

      • bunkerville Says:

        I should add the Greene’s state case that she “won” so far is being appealed at the state level. Next will be a federal case.

        Liked by 1 person

      • lgbmiel Says:

        Amen!!!

        I lost faith long ago.

        Publius Hulduh, a blog I follow. Her real name is Joanne, Joanna something. She’s an attorney.

        She is my go-to for everything Constitutional. Her blog has excellent resources!!

        She backs up everything she says with irrefutable citations.

        Using the courts to solve everything is not Constitutional, she explains.

        However, this is what progressives have done. They could not legislate their outlandish policies, can’t win elections on their candidates’ merits…so they use lawfare to get what they want.

        They pack courts with leftist judges who WANT to make unconstitutional law; who WANT to punish those of the opposite party.

        That is just one way they have destroyed our system and Country.

        Liked by 1 person

      • bunkerville Says:

        Thanks… will check it out… Supreme Roberts position as well… These are dangerous precedents. If a court can come in half way through the count and change the rules there is no rule of law…

        Like

    • Baysider Says:

      Precisely. Still, local jurisdictions take property they won’t return to its owner even if they are not even charged, much less convicted. All it takes in an accusation. Since seeing the scope of this problem, I have lost all confidence in the courts. You should not have to go through years of wrangling to get a ‘settlement’ offer for pennies on the dollar or property returned that has sat and gone to waste. You are owed your property + damages + a very public apology by the specific decision maker in your case + them being fined or jailed depending on malice. Not a letter signed by the city’s PR team.

      Liked by 2 people

      • bunkerville Says:

        Once faith is lost in the judiciary it is difficult if not impossible to govern.. I had a burglary. They found the thief and the “jewels” :). Anyway I could not have them back until he was tried …..ten years later…no trial, no conviction, no jewels…

        Liked by 2 people

      • Baysider Says:

        Aaargh!!! So do they put your stolen car in the police impound yard too until the thief is tried? Or your kid in an orphanage until the kidnapper is tried? Just thinking of the logical extension here of this mindset. I suspect I know what kind of jewels were involved.

        Liked by 1 person

      • lgbmiel Says:

        Civil asset forfeiture.

        So totally unconstitutional it’s maddening!!!

        It’s STEALING!!

        Liked by 1 person

  6. Bill Heffner Says:

    There is no need for alarm. Republicans will take control of Congress in November, and after that we will have free and fair elections. In case you failed to recognize the snark, “after that.”

    Liked by 3 people

  7. nrringlee Says:

    The cat is out of the bag, jack is out of his box, and the ‘liberal’ and ‘progressive’ masks have fallen away. The Cultural Marxists of the Progressive New Left now leading and populating the once-democratic party are fully exposed as the anti-American thugs that they have been for a long time. They know they cannot win elections because their ideas fail in the marketplace of reasoned dialog and fail the smell test for the vast majority if voters. So they must cheat, block, obscure and lie their way in to power. All conservatives need to do to win is to be the light illuminating the darkness of modern progressive ideology. Sane people gravitate toward the light, the truth shall prevail.

    Liked by 4 people

    • bunkerville Says:

      So well said. Thank you.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Nabi Rasch Says:

      Most mokes attracted to law are ‘progressives’ (types who want to force ‘change’.) They make money from introducing and arguing nonsense). Sit back and leave it to the legal community and they’ll run you into the ground, bury you. Since conservatives can’t rampage (they have too much to lose) they can never have the influence of groups like BLM or Antifa. They’re the harmless cattlem there to be manipulated.

      Liked by 1 person

  8. markone1blog Says:

    So, what really prompted this decision? Were so many criminals being released that appeals lawyers were not getting enough billable hours against the state to support those lawyers’ lavish lifestyles?

    Since we know that this will be appealed and those Republicans will likely be allowed to run when this gets to a higher court, is this an attempt to increase employment in ballot print shops?

    Alternatively, since Democrats seem willing to riot on headlines, is this a prompt to additional left-wing violence?

    Liked by 1 person

    • bunkerville Says:

      Not too far to appeal to… Three member 4th circuit of appeals ruled. next stop if they agree.. is the full 4th.. Then the Supremes which is doubtful. Roberts has made it clear he doesn’t want election cases.

      Liked by 1 person

      • markone1blog Says:

        Won’t refusing to hear the election case be the worst side of deciding the election? In Solomon’s case of hyperbolically offering to “split the baby” to make both sides equal, the real mother was exposed due to her compassion for the baby. In this case, “splitting the baby” by refusing to hear a central election issue exposes the bias in the court.

        Like

      • bunkerville Says:

        OK I’ll. buy into it…still there are state cases…. Greene won that for now. But the legal fees keep adding…. and then adjudication as Mustang so well laid out… and a jury of their peers? tell that to Durham and the jury he is working with.

        Liked by 1 person

  9. peter3nj Says:

    You ain’t seen nuthin yet. Does anyone actually believe the left will sit on its hands republican style should a red wave actually begin to take shape as the returns come in?The leftist judiciary will have its marching orders as will every left wing agitator group. Soros will be cooking on all four burners and chaos will reign supreme with mailboxes stuffed to the gills, ballots without dates or signatures holding up the final count for months with the courts deciding the elections. It’s not that long ago when these thoughts would only appear in Rod Serling’s twilight zone or Asimov’s futuristic science fiction novels. Welcome to today’s election day non-fiction coming to a theater near you. 🌘

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Mustang Says:

    So far, from what I can gather, the main charges of those involved in the 6 January incident, are (a) Obstruction of an official proceeding, (b) assault of police officers, (c) conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, (d) interstate communication of threats, (e) breaking and entering, (f) possession of a deadly weapon (bear spray), (g) parading in a public building, and (h) theft of government property — but no one (to my knowledge) has been charged with or found guilty of “insurrection.” What am I missing, here?

    Liked by 4 people

    • bunkerville Says:

      This effort to knock out GOP candidates is rather obtuse isn’t it? The Supremes have made it very clear they won’t get involved in election cases so here we go….

      It was a hard decision today whether this would be my post or how about the top 5 top GOP Michigan candidates for Governor were declared not have gotten enough signatures. So the wicked witch of Michigan is set for another term….

      Liked by 3 people

      • Mustang Says:

        How would Michigan’s canvassing board know if 9,000 signatures were invalid? If they have that capacity, then I’m impressed with their technology.

        Liked by 4 people

      • bunkerville Says:

        and who knows how many of the originals were replaced with duplicates for mischief.. I do despair at times.. But they are creative aren’t they?

        Liked by 3 people

      • peter3nj Says:

        No biggie. Who would believe the astute Michigan voters are salivating for change? For most Michiganders Detroit and Pontiac might as well be a million miles away.

        Liked by 2 people


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: