1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Rashid [163]
3 years ago
12

Help me explain please!!!!

History
1 answer:
hammer [34]3 years ago
7 0
Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, a little-discussed provision originally aimed at former Confederates. As relevant here, Section 3 says "no person" may "hold any office, civil or military, under the United States," who, "having previously taken an oath as…an officer of the United States…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."

Before we process, it important to state and describe what the First Amendment say.

The First Amendment states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
The freedoms in the First Amendment include the freedoms of religion, speech, press, assembly, and the right to petition the government.

Citing the article of impeachment against the President Trump;

Inciting his followers to violently obstruct the congressional affirmation of President-elect Joe Biden's victory last Wednesday. President Trump's "prior efforts to subvert and obstruct the certification of the results of the 2020 Presidential election,"

Those actions, the article says, "threatened the integrity of the democratic system, interfered with the peaceful transition of power, and imperiled a coequal branch of Government." Trump "thereby betrayed his trust as President, to the manifest injury of the people of the United States."

Most of President Trump supporters who were arrested among those that stormed the United States Congress stated that they were urged by what President Trump said calling on his supporters who showed up in D.C. to protest Congress’s certification of the Electoral College and Biden’s victory. When addressing the demonstration during a speech, he encouraged people present to march toward the Capitol, during his rally on January 6th to storm the US Congress therefore President Trump is liable to the cause of the insurrection. Many of the rioters were found to have posted unfounded claims promoted by Trump that the election had been stolen or that widespread voter fraud contributed to President-elect Joe Biden’s victory.

First, federal law makes it a crime to engage “in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof.” Someone who violates this statute faces a fine and up to 10 years in prison.

This law makes it a crime to incite such a rebellion, too, and violators “shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.” Thus, to the extent that a government official was complicit in Wednesday’s riot, they could potentially be stripped of their office.

Second, the law prohibits a “seditious conspiracy” to “overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States” or to “by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States.” Participants in such a conspiracy could face up to 20 years in prison.

Third, federal law provides that “whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States ... by force or violence” may face up to 20 years in prison, and may also be stripped of their ability to be employed by the federal government for up to five years.
Because this statute criminalizes speech, anyone charged under it would likely claim that prosecuting them violates the First Amendment. But the Supreme Court recognizes several exceptions to the First Amendment for things like incitement to imminent criminal acts or so-called “true threats.” So some of the insurrectionists might be convicted under this statute despite constitutional safeguards for free speech.

Finally, another statute makes it a crime to conspire “to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person ... in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States.” Thus, to the extent that members of Congress were exercising a “privilege” secured to them by the Constitution while they were disrupted by rioters, those rioters could potentially face criminal charges.
Violators of this statute face up to 10 years in prison.


You might be interested in
A colony directly controlled by the English king would be a _____.
yaroslaw [1]
The answer would be B. Crown Colony
4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Does the fact that the above army marched under the banner of a religion make any difference in the fate of the people on the lo
jok3333 [9.3K]

Answer:

The answer is "No"

Explanation:

With the end of  the Cold War, researchers found religions development as a ground breaking political power in the contemporary world however it might have been there from the start.

Similarly as there isn't simple approach to characterize religion, so there is no relapse examination conceivable to state when religion is a significant reason alone, when it is a significant however auxiliary reason, and when it is a guise used to encourage war. History is, all things considered, not a science. Yet, religion, when used by a state, causes battle to appear to be good by legitimating it as in reason, declaring that murdering is morally supported, and giving comfort to the dispossessed.

3 0
2 years ago
Why did Americans board there ship Lusitania
patriot [66]

Answer:

British ocean liner, the sinking of which by a German U-boat on May 7, 1915, contributed indirectly to the entry of the United States into World War I. The Lusitania, which was owned by the Cunard Line, was built to compete for the highly lucrative transatlantic passenger trade.

Explanation:

7 0
3 years ago
Civil magistrates in Massachusetts set up a special court in 1692 to
swat32

Answer:

pass the Half-Way Covenant.

Explanation:

8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
How does Twain satirize typical advice about obeying one’s parents
LuckyWell [14K]

Answer:

Twain believed that obeying is the best policy because if children don't behave, their parents will make them do it regardless. Twain instructs the youth to avoid violence by actually enforcing it upon someone, and then regretting it and apologizing for acting in such an uncivil way.

6 0
2 years ago
Other questions:
  • A major contribution of the Jews of ancient times was the __________.
    12·1 answer
  • Who thought that the constitution was an economic document drawn with superb skill by men whose property interests were immediat
    5·1 answer
  • Tokyo is the capital of which country?
    6·2 answers
  • What does the term “melting pot” describe? the removal of certain nationalities from a larger group the resistance of cultures t
    14·1 answer
  • How did the end of the cold war shift the international balance of power
    8·2 answers
  • A mixed economy combines features of other economic systems by:
    13·1 answer
  • Which of these was not the demand by the Congress
    9·1 answer
  • I need this done please
    10·1 answer
  • What african region had pyramids hieroglyphs and tombs
    6·2 answers
  • which area of study has a name that did not originate from the greek language a. History b. psychology c. physics d. algebra hel
    13·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!