[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Police clash with pro-Palestine protesters on Ohio State University campus

Joe Rogan Experience #2138 - Tucker Carlson

Police Dispersing Student Protesters at USC - Breaking News Coverage (College Protests)

What Passover Means For The New Testament Believer

Are We Closer Than Ever To The Next Pandemic?

War in Ukraine Turns on Russia

what happened during total solar eclipse

Israel Attacks Iran, Report Says - LIVE Breaking News Coverage

Earth is Scorched with Heat

Antiwar Activists Chant ‘Death to America’ at Event Featuring Chicago Alderman

Vibe Shift

A stream that makes the pleasant Rain sound.

Older Men - Keep One Foot In The Dark Ages

When You Really Want to Meet the Diversity Requirements

CERN to test world's most powerful particle accelerator during April's solar eclipse

Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone

No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT

Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots

Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks

Questioning the Big Bang

James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang

Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began

A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go

Early humans had sex with chimps

O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp.

Biblical Contradictions (Alleged)

Catholic Church Praising Lucifer

Raising the Knife

One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make..

Houthi rebels' attack severely damages a Belize-flagged ship in key strait leading to the Red Sea (British Ship)

Chinese Illegal Alien. I'm here for the moneuy

Red Tides Plague Gulf Beaches

Tucker Carlson calls out Nikki Haley, Ben Shapiro, and every other person calling for war:

{Are there 7 Deadly Sins?} I’ve heard people refer to the “7 Deadly Sins,” but I haven’t been able to find that sort of list in Scripture.

Abomination of Desolation | THEORY, BIBLE STUDY

Bible Help

Libertysflame Database Updated

Crush EVERYONE with the Alien Gambit!

Vladimir Putin tells Tucker Carlson US should stop arming Ukraine to end war

Putin hints Moscow and Washington in back-channel talks in revealing Tucker Carlson interview

Trump accuses Fulton County DA Fani Willis of lying in court response to Roman's motion

Mandatory anti-white racism at Disney.

Iceland Volcano Erupts For Third Time In 2 Months, State Of Emergency Declared

Tucker Carlson Interview with Vladamir Putin

How will Ar Mageddon / WW III End?

What on EARTH is going on in Acts 16:11? New Discovery!

2023 Hottest in over 120 Million Years

2024 and beyond in prophecy

Questions

This Speech Just Broke the Internet


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

The Establishments war on Donald Trump
See other The Establishments war on Donald Trump Articles

Title: ANNULMENT OF THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY
Source: Facebook
URL Source: https://www.facebook.com/RBReich/posts/2106665592679359
Published: Aug 23, 2018
Author: Robert Reich
Post Date: 2018-08-24 00:40:00 by nolu chan
Keywords: None
Views: 7071
Comments: 48

[23 August 2018]

Robert Reich
11 hrs

ANNULMENT OF THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY

Suppose Robert Mueller comes up with overwhelming evidence that Trump colluded with Russia to become President, and that, were it not for Russia’s actions during the election, Trump would not have been elected. In other words, Trump’s presidency is not authorized under the United States Constitution.

Impeachment in the House and conviction in the Senate would remove Trump from office. This would remedy Trump’s “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

But impeachment would not remedy Trump’s unconstitutional presidency because it would leave in place his vice president, White House staff and Cabinet, as well as all the executive orders he issued and all the legislation he signed, and the official record of his presidency.

The only way to respond to an unconstitutional presidency is to annul it. Annulment would repeal all of an unconstitutional president’s appointments and executive actions, and would eliminate the official record of the presidency. Annulment would recognize that all such appointments, actions, and records were made without constitutional authority.

The Constitution does not specifically provide for annulment of an unconstitutional presidency. But read as a whole, the Constitution leads to the logical conclusion that annulment is the appropriate remedy for one.

After all, the Supreme Court can declare legislation that doesn’t comport with the Constitution null and void. It would logically follow that the Court could declare all the legislation and executive actions of a presidency unauthorized by the Constitution to be null and void.

The Constitution also gives Congress and the states the power to amend the Constitution, thereby annulling or altering whatever provisions came before. Here, too, it would logically follow that Congress and the states could, through amendment, annul the actions of a presidency they determine to be unconstitutional.

I am not suggesting that constitutional annulment of the Trump presidency is likely. I am only arguing that, in the face of overwhelming evidence that his presidency was never authorized under the Constitution, there are ample grounds for arguing it should and can be annulled.

Your thoughts?

- - - - - - - - - -

Poster comment: Trump Derangement Syndrome

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 9.

#1. To: nolu chan (#0)

The USSC would doubtless come into play in this scenario, which is problematic as one of the members is a Trump appointee.

Is there any body with the authority to remove him from the USSC besides himself?

Pinguinite  posted on  2018-08-24   1:14:48 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: Pinguinite (#1) (Edited)

Is there any body with the authority to remove him [Gorsuch?] from the USSC besides himself?

The Congress via impeachment in the House and conviction in the Senate.

nolu chan  posted on  2018-08-24   8:16:48 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: nolu chan (#8)

But impeachment is not annulment. And the question was how to go about an annulment. Gorsuch has already opined on cases, and annulment would mean back tracking on those decisions in which his vote changed the outcome. Impeachment would not do that.

Pinguinite  posted on  2018-08-24   9:50:46 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 9.

#10. To: Pinguinite (#9)

But impeachment is not annulment. And the question was how to go about an annulment. Gorsuch has already opined on cases, and annulment would mean back tracking on those decisions in which his vote changed the outcome. Impeachment would not do that.

There is no such thing as annulment of a presidency. That is merely Reich's manifestation of Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Nobody has ever tried this with a presidency, but attempts were made to annul a ratification of a pending amendment to the Constitution.

The issue is a non-justiciable political question, inappropriate for judicial determination. As a non-justiciable political question, the Court would not take it up for decision, and Justice Gorsuch would not present any problem.

Once an election is officially certified, it is beyond judicial action.

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/307/433/case.html

Coleman v. Miller, 307 U.S. 433 (1939)

3. In accordance with the precedent of the Fourteenth Amendment, the efficacy of ratification of a proposed amendment to the Federal Constitution by a state legislature which had previously rejected the proposal is held a question for the political departments, with the ultimate authority in the Congress in the exercise of its control over the promulgation of the adoption of the amendment. P. 307 U. S. 447.

4. The legislature of Kansas having actually ratified the proposed Child Labor Amendment, this Court should not restrain the state officers from certifying the ratification to the Secretary of State because of an earlier rejection, and thus prevent the question from coming before the political departments. There is found no basis in either Constitution or statute for such judicial action. P. 307 U. S. 450.

5. R.S. § 205; 5 U.S.C. 160, presupposes official notice to the Secretary of State when a state legislature has adopted a resolution of ratification. No warrant is seen for judicial interference with the performance of that duty. P. 307 U. S. 450.

6. The Congress, in controlling the promulgation of the adoption of a constitutional amendment, has the final determination of the question whether, by lapse of time, its proposal of the amendment had lost its vitality before being adopted by the requisite number of legislatures. P. 307 U. S. 451.

7. In determining whether a question falls within the category of political nonjusticiable questions, the appropriateness under our system of government of attributing finality to the action of the political departments, and also the lack of satisfactory criteria for a judicial determination, are dominant considerations. P. 307 U. S. 454.

nolu chan  posted on  2018-08-24 12:11:27 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 9.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com