Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Indiana University law professor Gerard Magliocca, an expert on the 14th Amendment’s “insurrectionist ban,” testifies at former President Donald Trump’s disqualification trial in Colorado ...
Trump v. Anderson, 601 U.S. 100 (2024), is a U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court unanimously held that states could not determine eligibility for federal office, including the presidency, under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Advocacy groups and critics of former President Donald Trump tried to remove him from the 2024 presidential ballot based on the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, which says public officials ...
There’s a lot going on in the Fourteenth Amendment that requires nuanced dissection. A myriad of legal questions arises in Trump’s case, some of which the Colorado Court grapples, some they ...
the 14th Amendment protects those beyond the racial classes of white or Negro Briggs v. Elliott: 1952 347 U.S. 483 Brown case 1 Summerton, South Carolina Davis v. County School Board of Prince Edward County: 1952 103 F. Supp. 337 Brown Case 2 - Prince Edward County, Virginia Gebhart v. Belton: 1952 33 Del. Ch. 144 Brown Case 2 - Claymont ...
A trial to determine if the 14th Amendment’s “insurrectionist ban” applies to former President Donald Trump is set to begin Monday in Denver, an historic but likely longshot case that could ...
Richardson v. Ramirez, 418 U.S. 24 (1974), [1] was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held, 6–3, that convicted felons could be barred from voting beyond their sentence and parole without violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution.
An effort to use the legal system to bar former President Trump from returning to the White House — on the basis that he aided an insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021 — is picking up speed.