The Supreme Court has again failed the Nation and the Constitution. Their  job is to interpret the Constitution. Here again their interpretation has said, something that it doesn’t say. I get really frustrated when I see that the Supreme Court is more interested in maintaining the power of the Federal Government and the political parties that control the government. The Supreme Court has stated that individual States cannot declare Trump ineligible for the upcoming election. The Ruling makes it clear that only Congress can set the rules on how the 14^th Amendment provision can be enforced against Federal office seekers. This decision will apply to all States. They stated, States will retain the power to bar people running for State office from appearing on the ballot under section 3. Now I have written at least three posting about the subject and I did not come to the same conclusion. Just like they did with the 2^nd amendment and Roe vs. Wade the Supreme Court is ruling without consulting history or what the writers wanted to happen.

Do you know that our Founding Fathers did not list qualifications you had to have to become a Supreme Court Justice? Of the 114 Justices that have been appointed to the court only 49 had law degrees. I wonder why that would not be a requirement? I personally think it is because the job of the Supreme Court is to interpret the Constitution and to not the write laws. I think it is probably just as helpful to have a good sense of history as it is with knowledge of the law. I have stated before that you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to read and understand the Constitution.  I think that I should be able to read it and understand it. Our problem has always been the person that twists the words to make them fit the point that serves their purpose. By the Constitution I am qualified to be a Supreme Court Justice and I don’t even have a college education. I don’t think that it was supposed to be an elitist branch of the Government that could be manipulated for the power of the government. I personally think the problem with the court, especially Chief Robert’s court, it is aligned too much with party politics and power and the money behind the party politics and not with what the Constitution actually says or how history supports what it says. I wonder if the Supreme Court will be the downfall of our Republic.

 As I have written before. After the Civil War there were not a whole bunch of trials where people like Robert E Lee were found guilty of Insurrection. It was an automatic response. Congress did not rule if he was eligible to hold office. It was automatic. The Constitution does not say that Congress has the power to say who is eligible. It says that by a two-thirds majority they can say whether an insurrectionist can be on the ballot. Who has the power? Section 3 of the 14^th Amendment actually doesn’t state that. There is no conviction tied to it and it seems if you fought against the Government and you did not up hold your oath of office it was automatic that you couldn’t run. “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold an office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of a State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House remove such disability.”  That is just one paragraph, but, the one paragraph speaks volumes. If you notice it says that Congress may by a vote of two thirds of each House remove such disability. To me it says that it should take a two thirds vote to put  Trump on the ballot. The wording of Section 3 of the 14^th Amendment as it is pointed out in the paper written by Baude and Stokes is interesting. It states that “No person shall be”. It does not mention convicted in the entire section. To me it says  just committing the act is what kicks in the 14^th Amendment, not being convicted of it. I will point out that the Insurrection and everything that was attached to it, like the fake electors, and the lies to protect the insurrectionists and its planners was all part of a coup to burn the Constitution.  Another thing I got out of reading the paper is that it is self-enacting which to me means it should automatically happen and does not take a Judge or Congress to enact it. It should be their responsibility of all that are in charge of an election to invoke the Section 3 of the 14^th Amendment. Robert E Lee and Jefferson Davis were not declared ineligible by the Courts or Congress, the 14^th amendment did that. To me it appears that every person that participated or aided in the conspiracy to install Trump into the White House are automatically ineligible to be on a ballot. After they are denied they then can challenge it, in Court. We are expecting the Courts or Congress to declare Trump and others ineligible when it should actually be the States and individual counties that should be doing it, and then the Courts or Congress can decide afterwards. The President was not alone. It was an insurrection by the people that tried to do everything possible to install a person that was not elected President into the White House. That is in my opinion the breaking of their Oath of Office. Breaking your Oath of Office is not part of Free Speech. It looks like the 14^th Amendment supersedes free speech because the act, of insurrection, is an attack on the very document that guarantees that free speech. If you fight to burn that document the rights that document gives you cannot be used as a defense.

I know people will tell me that it was unanimous by the Court that Trump could not be taken of the ballot by the States. The Constitution does not say that it is up to Congress to decide if Trump is ineligible. In fact is says just the opposite. The ruling warned of the chaos if State Officials have the freedom to determine who could appear on the ballot. Their ruling said that “The result could well be that a single candidate would be declared ineligible in some states but not in others based on the same conduct”. I agree that it would cause a lot of chaos but that is not the Supreme Court’s decision to stop the chaos. The Supreme Courts job is not to write the law to stop the chaos, it is Congress’s job to write the laws that stop the chaos. It is the Supreme Court’s job to decide if the laws are constitutional. Is this how the courts failed Germany? Is this how all those people died because of a court being afraid to do what is right? I am afraid the Supreme Court will be the tool of our destruction.