unique visitors counter Dem Rep Urges Nancy Pelosi To Kick Jim Jordan Out Of Congress For Joining Texas Lawsuit – Washington News

Dem Rep Urges Nancy Pelosi To Kick Jim Jordan Out Of Congress For Joining Texas Lawsuit


Sharing is caring!

U.S. Rep. Bill Pascrell, Jr. (D-NJ-09) is calling on Nancy Pelosi to kick Jim Jordan and other GOP Reps who joined the Texas lawsuit out of Congress.

Pascrell wrote a letter to Pelosi and other House leaders demanding they sanction and exclude from the 117th Congress any Members who are supporting Donald Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

Pascrell cites the text of Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment which disqualifies from service any individuals who seek to attack American democracy which is a stretch.

But what is not a stretch is that Pelosi can actually try it if she wants because each chamber of Congress ultimately has the power to decide who gets to join it.

The Supreme Court has ruled limiting these powers so there is no guarantee she would win, but if proper procedures are followed she can make a constitutional argument why she should be able to disqualify anyone she wants after they have been sworn in. So while this is a mostly empty threat there is a small chance she would prevail if she tried it.

Pascrell wrote:

“Stated simply, men and women who would act to tear the United States government apart cannot serve as Members of the Congress. These lawsuits seeking to obliterate public confidence in our democratic system by invalidating the clear results of the 2020 presidential election undoubtedly attack the text and spirit of the Constitution, which each Member swears to support and defend.”

“Consequently, I call on you to exercise the power of your offices to evaluate steps you can take to address these constitutional violations this Congress and, if possible, refuse to seat in the 117th Congress any Members-elect seeking to make Donald Trump an unelected dictator.”

“Article I, Section 5 of the United States Constitution gives each chamber of Congress ultimate responsibility to decide its membership, positing that “each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members.”

“Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment stipulates that: “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof…”

“Consequently, I call on you to exercise the power of your offices to evaluate steps you can take to address these constitutional violations this Congress and, if possible, refuse to seat in the 117th Congress any Members-elect seeking to make Donald Trump an unelected dictator.”

“Just as the American people’s clear vote in support of President-elect Biden must be respected, so too must votes cast in favor of our Members-elect. But the actions of any of our colleagues to demolish democracy, regardless of party affiliation, must be repudiated in the strongest possible terms. Rising from the embers of the Civil War, the Fourteenth Amendment was written to prevent the destruction of the United States from without and within. The moment we face now may be without parallel since 1860. The fate of our democracy depends on us meeting that moment.”

From Holland and Knight:

In 1969, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Speaker of the House could not exclude a duly-elected candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives. In Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486 (1969), the Supreme Court ruled that the House’s Constitutional authority to judge the qualifications of its own members was post facto and could only be exercised via expulsion after a 2/3rd affirmative vote. In other words, the House and Senate have no discretion when deciding whether to seat a candidate who has been duly elected under state law, but may take steps to expel that member after they have been sworn-in. The Court decided that the constitutional rights of the voters and the states takes precedence over the rights of Congress until the candidate is sworn-in as a member. Although this case involved the House of Representatives, there is no indication the Court would view a candidate duly elected to the Senate any differently.