A judge’s decision to allow an effort to block Republican Marjorie Taylor Green’s candidacy (R-Ga.) Could pave a new path for an attack on some of the Republican Party’s most controversial lawmakers.
Experts say it remains to be seen what the outcome of the one-off decision will be, but it is unlikely that such an effort will remove Green or any other candidate from the ballot. However, this could give Democrats another opportunity to strike at the Republican Party over the January 6, 2021 attack on the US Capitol and force lawmakers to testify under oath.
Republicans, meanwhile, warn that efforts could backfire in the future.
While many said they were surprised that the effort was given the green light, some Republicans accused Obama-appointed Judge Amy Tottenberg of having liberal leanings that politicized the process.
“The judge is incredibly liberal, so I’m not surprised she’s going to do that, but I was very surprised they even let this happen,” said Jay Williams, a Georgia-based Republican strategist.
Tottenberg’s decision means Green will be called to testify on Friday, making her the first member of Congress to testify under oath of the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.
The challenge, filed by the Free Speech for the People group on behalf of a group of voters in Georgia last month to the Georgian secretary of state’s office, accuses the congresswoman of helping facilitate the uprising, which they say violates the 14th Amendment. makes it inadmissible to run for re-election.
The amendment says no one can serve in Congress, “who, after having been sworn in as a member of Congress. . . to support the Constitution of the United States, they must take part in an uprising or revolt against it. ”
It was ratified after the Civil War in an attempt to prevent MPs who fought for the Confederacy from returning to Congress.
Green filed a lawsuit earlier this month demanding that the judge declare the law used by voters to challenge Green’s eligibility to vote “unconstitutional” and block Georgia officials from using it.
Lawrence Tribe, an honorary professor of constitutional law at Harvard Law School, said the case against Green was well thought out and aided by what he called “indisputable factual evidence” of her role in the attack.
“After taking an oath of allegiance to our constitution, it acted in coordination with conspirators close to defeated President Trump to overthrow the 2020 presidential election and change the outcome,” Tribe told The Hill. “The fact that the result she is looking for has not been achieved is irrelevant. Hers is a paradigm case for issuing a final disqualification from holding public office.
Other legal and political experts doubt whether the effort will move to the next step at all.
“I guess it’s possible, but I certainly wouldn’t want to bet on the farm for that,” said Charles Bullock, a professor at the School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Georgia.
“There is no history of this, and if there is, you will have to go back to the late 1860s,” he continued.
However, the idea has been raised in recent history with respect to other figures. Some Democrats, constitutional scholars and proponents of democracy have quietly explored how the 14th Amendment could disqualify former President Trump, who is once again in public office for his role in the attack on the Capitol.
An analysis by The Hill in January found that about a dozen Democratic lawmakers had spoken publicly or privately in the past year about how Section 3 of the 14th Amendment could be applied to those who took part in the uprising.
Last month, a federal judge blocked a lawsuit challenging the candidacy of Madison Cotton (R) of North Carolina. Similar to Green’s case, voters in the state of Kotorn, represented by the same group, filed a lawsuit with the State Electoral Council in January, claiming that Kotorn’s comments in a speech shortly before the uprising violated the 14th Amendment.
The co-chair of the 11 voters seeking to block Cauthorn from taking office called for the decision to be overturned on appeal.
“We have already seen in North Carolina that this has not been successful and so it is not clear how this would have been different,” said Republican national strategist Doug Hay.
But the question remains as to how these efforts could affect figures like Green and Kotorn from a political point of view.
Green described the move to block her from running as a personal attack on members of her area by liberal outsiders during an interview with Conservative talk show host Tucker Carlson on Fox News on Monday.
“These people hate people in my area so much,” Green said. “They look down on them because they voted for me and sent me to Washington to fight for things that most Americans are interested in.
“They hired several lawyers from New York who hate people in my area and don’t believe they should have the right to choose who they want to send to Washington,” she said.
Green later hinted at how efforts could set a precedent for Republicans to block Democrats from running for office.
“I bet we could bring together some Republican voters who don’t like Kamala Harris to fund criminal rebels from prison, or Ilhan Omar, or Corey Bush, or Maxine Waters, who incite riots,” Green said. “I think there’s another way to play this game.”
The congresswoman’s campaign team tweeted the videos on Tuesday, enveloping him with a call to donate to her re-election campaign.
Green is preparing for his first candidacy for re-election in the Republican 14th Congressional District. Five Republicans lined up to challenge her in the May 25 primary, but Green’s position and fundraising power gave her a clear advantage.
Democrats reported that one of Green’s Democratic contenders, Marcus Flowers, had surpassed Green in the first three months of the year. Flowers brought in $ 2.4 million, while Green earned less than $ 1.1 million in the same period.
But it would be difficult for any Democrat to oust Green in a general election. Although the seat in Congress has been affected by redirection, it is still strongly Republican.
Regarding the political impact of efforts to block Green’s tenure, Republicans of all persuasions say it will only boost the already energized conservative base.
But the effort could also put Green in a position to devote time, energy and resources to tackling the issue. There is also the question of how Green’s optics, which testified under oath about the January 6 attacks in court, could be used against her.
“You can’t ignore him,” said Chuck Clay, a former Republican senator and chairman of the Republican Party of Georgia. “So to the extent that she has to respond to explain or spend money on her own behalf, I guess as a tactic, there’s some value in that, as well as looking at it by extending it.”
Green said she had to testify in an interview with a conservative newspaper this week, saying she was “forced” to go to the witness box.
The Hill’s Morning Report – Putin tests ICBM, withdraws from Mariupol plant Five states that could replace Iowa in the early primary calendar
“I was actually put on the witness stand on Friday. “I am the first Republican member of Congress to be forced to testify under oath and defend myself against lies and something I have never done,” she said.
And while the case is being monitored by political circles in Washington and Georgia, others are wondering how much attention voters are actually paying in the area.
“I have not received a single phone call about this, except for reporters who have called me about it. “I don’t know that many Republicans are really too worried about that to be honest with you,” Williams said.
Add Comment