Then read Cruz argument 1-B (pages 9 - 11)

This is where Cruz and friends lay out the argument I explained.

Cruz says (1) Congress has the power to remove the disability, (2) section 3 doesn't prevent a person from running for office, and (3) keeping Trump off the ballot denies Congress its power under section 3.

I am not sure that Hasan ever effectively refutes that point.

2/

Hasan says that yes, Congress has the ability to remove the disability, but in the past when it did so (after the Civil War) there was never a finding that there had been an insurrection.

I don't think it would have occurred to anyone after a bloody Civil War to make a formal fact finding that there was a rebellion.

Hasan also talks about "concurrent jurisdiction" but it gest murky.

Anyway, Cruz argument 1-B seems to me the easiest way out for SCOTUS, if SCOTUS wants out.

3/

If you want to ask a question, make sure you read my blog post first.

Thanks.

It's here: https://terikanefield.com/section-3-and-the-spirit-of-liberty/

I am talking about one particular argument, the argument that I think is the strongest in Trump's favor.

If SCOTUS decides for Trump on that issue, the Court will not have to reach any other issues.

That's why it's the easiest way out for them.

4/

Adding: I don't believe that section 5 means that legislation is needed to enforce section 3.

After all, no legislation is needed to enforce the equal protection clause or the due process clause.

Reasonable minds can differ on this, but it seems to me that it isn't necessary. (At one point, Chief Justice Salmon Chase thought that legislation was needed.)

This issue seems much easier than the one I mentioned earlier about the disability clause and the ballot issue.

5/