U.S. District Court Judge Explains Why He Ruled in Favor of Congressman Madison Cawthorn

On March 10, U.S. District Court Judge Richard E. Myers issued a written opinion in Cawthorn v Circosta, e.d., 5:22cv-50. This is the North Carolina case filed by Congressman Madison Cawthorn, to stop election officials from determining if he meets the constitutional qualifications to run for Congress. On March 4, Judge Myers had ruled from the bench that the Fourteenth Amendment, section three, is longer in force because Congress passed bills in 1872 and 1898 giving everyone an amnesty. See the part of the opinion that starts on page 19.

On March 11, North Carolina election officials filed a notice of appeal. In the Fourth Circuit the case number is 22-1251.


Comments

U.S. District Court Judge Explains Why He Ruled in Favor of Congressman Madison Cawthorn — 42 Comments

  1. IMO, the judge is wrong and the “heretofore” of the amnesties indicated Congress was clearly only applying them to the present time.

  2. A statute can’t override the constitution or any amendment, only another amendment can. As such the Amnesty Act of 1872 should have been ruled unconstitutional over 100 years ago, as it tried to modify a constitutional amendment without being ratified by the states. The point of the constitution is to create boundaries the government can’t cross or overturn without first passing an amendment through the several states that compose the union.

  3. The judge’s reasoning was wrong, although the outcome was correct. He should have ruled that there was no insurrection, and that even if there had been, Cawthorn was not a participant.

  4. Seriously, how can a law override the Constitution? If this can be appealed, then it should definitely be done so.

  5. It will get appealed, and hopefully the reasoning will be corrected, but in the end Cawthorn will remain in Congress next term.

  6. The 14th Amendment expressly states:

    “Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.”

    The Amnesty Act of 1872 did not amend the Constitution. It provided for a way to override the disability.

  7. In other words, the 14th Amendment provided a way to override the disability it imposed, which Congress did through the Amnesty Act. In no way was the Amnesty Act unconstitutional.

  8. Dale is wrong, and we should note that. Per Saturn (shockingly, I agree with him on something), Aiden is also wrong. Therefore, Leo is also wrong.
    I am curious about Saturn’s take on the Amnesty Act, whether he thinks the “heretofore” does indeed mean “up to this point,” which is its normal meaning.
    Short Reader is tentatively wrong, as the state could win on appeal.

  9. No,I’m not wrong. There was no insurrection. To compare a few hundred people at a completely legal demonstration, including more than a few false flag operatives,get baited into trespassing…of whom, a few dozen engaged in minor vandalism …to the war between the States, is absolutely ludicrous. Anyone making such a comparison should be ridiculed and shamed.

    But even if you stretch the definition of insurrection beyond recognition, Cawthorn was not one of the trespassers. There is no sense whatsoever in which he took up arms to overthrow the government. That is just a plain lie, not even a distortion. There is zero chance it will survive with a 6-3 conservative Supreme Court being the final arbiter. No way, no how, not happening.

  10. The garbage comments on March 11, 2022 at 10:05 am and 5:04 pm are from Robert K Stock.

  11. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amnesty_Act

    1872 USA law – mere 9 days – intro to Prez Grant signed.

    Earlier Prez Johnson pardoned lots of Confeds.

    Who exactly determines if the named officers ***shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion*** agst the USA regime ???

    Gerrymander Congress ???
    Prez or a Prez hack ???
    Courts – INCL COURT MARTIALS ???
    MEDIA ???
    OTHER – PUBLIC CONFESSION ???

    ANOTHER CASE FOR SCOTUS ???

  12. OBVIOUSLY MOST [95-99 PCT PLUS] OF THE 1861-1865 CONFEDS HAD N-O-T BEEN USA/STATE OFFICERS-

    ESP PRIVATES TO SGTS.

  13. I have never commented under the name SocraticGadfly or any other pseudonym. Unlike the liar who calls themself “the truth” I always comment under my own name. I have no opinion on the matter of Congressman Cawthorn. If people in his district are happy with him then he will be re-elected. It should not be a decision of any Court wether State or Federal.

  14. I dislike the ancient Greek philosopher Socrates. I hold Plato and Aristotle in equal disdain. Fuck the Stoics, the Cynics, and most of the other ancient schools of philosophy. The only Greek philosopher I do like is Epicurus.

  15. Let Mr. Winger reveal if my email address has ever been the source of any comment other than the comments in my name.

  16. I feel the whole argument fails at the start:

    1. It needs confirmed by some official government body that an insurrection occurred.
    2. It needs to then be proved or at the least demonstrated Mr. Cawthorn was guilty of participating in said insurrection, and you are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. That’s not how things worked in the 1860s but this is more opaque and society more litigious nowadays.
    3. Neither numbers 1 or 2 are within the purview of the North Carolina State Election Board.

    Jim Banks of Indiana was challenged on these grounds before an Indiana Election Commission hearing, no evidence was provided by the challenger and it was easily swatted away by Banks’ representative. Board were unanimous in dismissal, 2 Republicans and 2 Democrats.

  17. Robert Stock’s e-mail address has never been the source of any comment on this website, other than comments signed by him.

  18. “The truth” is printing garbage himself if he thinks I’m Robert Stock, as Robert Stock and our host both know. Dale is still wrong on Jan. 6, 2021. It was an insurrection, Trumpy. And, “getting baited”? “False flag operatives”? You’re not just wrong, you’re a LIAR. Period and end of story.

    As to whether Cawthorn can reasonably be claimed to have given aid and comfort, that’s the matter at hand.

    Sadly, as I’ve said before, red state Tex-ass has no way of getting Kenny Boy Paxton to face similar music.

  19. Dale: I have NEVER commented under the name SocraticGadfly or any other pseudonym. I only comment under my own name.

  20. Dale: What do you have to say regarding Mr Winger stating that I have only commented under my own name?

  21. That’s not what he said. He said your email address was always associated with your name. It’s easy to fill in different email addresses.

  22. I only have one email. I don’t even know how to use another. I am nearly computer illiterate.

  23. That is why I never post links. I don’t know how. I have never been able to copy and paste or do the most elementary actions that others take for granted. I can open, read, and reply to my email, but nothing more. I can reply to these posts, but I have absolutely no idea how to hide or change where my posts originate.

  24. Stock is a bad liar. You can fill in anything you want under the email portion, which he clearly does. He’s fishing for attention.

  25. Mike: You have to write a valid email address. My understanding is if you make up a nonexistent email address then it won’t post.

  26. Mike: Getting back to the subject of this post. I do not care if Congressman Cawthorn is re-elected or not. However, no Court wether State or Federal should be involved. It is solely a matter for the voters in the District. What do you think Mike?

  27. Wrong, retard. You can pit in any email you want, which is what you do when you post as pseudonyms. Just admit it your game is up.

  28. Ted: As I have said I am nearly computer illiterate. Thank you for the knowledge.

    I have NEVER used a pseudonym. I only comment with my real name. I have NEVER commented as SocraticGadfly.

  29. Lies, all lies from Stock. I’ve never met an honest communist.

  30. HOW MANY OLDE DONKEYS PURGED IN THE OLDE 1860-1866 USA CONGRESSES AND N/W FREE STATES ???

    WHAT DONKEY CANDIDATE SINCE OCT 1929 HAS N-O-T BEEN A COMMIE// RACIST / SEXIST STATIST MONSTER ???

  31. @ William Saturn…. You are correct, the 14th does permit congress to override by 2/3rds majority. I missed that portion. However, the bill was passed by voice vote in the house. There’s no record of whether 2/3rds was actually achieved or if it was simply a simple majority.

  32. The whole amendment was passed in an illegal manner with some stares not allowed to vote or occupied.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.