Discover the dramatic story of the 'First Insurrection' and its relevance to the Fourteenth Amendment. Explore the parallels between the 1860s insurrection and the recent Trump-fueled insurrection. Delve into the concept of the 50 state solution and the role of Congress. Uncover the controversy surrounding justices and access to deliberations. Explore the actions of Floyd and the heroism of Ulysses S. Grant in relation to the 14th Amendment.
Understanding the historical parallels between the first insurrection of the 1860s and the recent Trump-fueled insurrection is crucial in interpreting Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
Considering the responsibility of outgoing presidents to ensure a peaceful transfer of power, the case highlights the importance of preventing attempts to disrupt the Electoral College process.
The introduction of Part Two presents 20 key questions and punchy answers that aid the court in addressing important aspects of the case.
Deep dives
The First Insurrection of the 1860s
This summary introduces the argument by highlighting the parallels between the first insurrection of the 1860s and the recent Trump-fueled insurrection. It emphasizes that before the Civil War, there was a smaller insurrection that aimed to prevent the lawful inauguration of President Lincoln and that individuals within James Buchanan's cabinet violated their oaths to support the Constitution. The summary highlights the significance of understanding this historical episode to properly interpret Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. It also mentions that the trial court has already made factual findings that support applying Section 3 to Trump's actions.
A 50 State Solution
The summary briefly introduces the concept of a 50 state solution, wherein different states can have different procedures for implementing Section 3. It mentions that this approach enables Colorado to act and the court should recognize Colorado's power in this regard. It touches on the role of Congress and its power to grant amnesty.
Remarkably Similar Facts
The summary argues that the facts surrounding the Trump-fueled insurrection are remarkably similar to those of the first insurrection of the 1860s. It references Senate discussions from that time where senators vehemently opposed individuals involved in the earlier insurrection. The summary emphasizes the relevance and importance of considering this historical episode in interpreting Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
Introduction of Part Two: The 20 Questions
The summary mentions the introduction of Part Two of the brief, which presents 20 questions and punchy answers related to key issues and implications of the case. The 20 questions aim to assist the court in understanding and addressing important aspects of the case.
John B. Floyd's Betrayal and Insurrection
John B. Floyd, a cabinet secretary during the Buchanan administration, used his power to aid an insurrection by moving troops and resources to make federal forts in the South undefendable. His actions left the United States defenseless and unprotected in the South. Floyd's betrayal of his oath and dereliction of duty are reminiscent of Benedict Arnold. He eventually joined the Confederate army as a brigadier general but was seen as a coward for abandoning the battlefield. This parallel between Floyd's actions and those of Donald J. Trump in inciting the January 6th insurrection draws attention to the responsibility of outgoing presidents to ensure a peaceful transfer of power.
Efforts to Prevent Lincoln's Inauguration and the Duty of Outgoing Presidents
There were active plots to prevent President-elect Lincoln's inauguration, with concerns raised in Congress about anti-Lincoln plotters attempting to interfere with the counting and certification of electoral votes. The fortification of the Capitol on February 13, 1861 prevented the disruption of the Electoral College process. Outgoing President Buchanan and General Winfield Scott took action to safeguard the peaceful transfer of power. The duty of an outgoing president, as stated by Secretary of War Joseph Holt, is to ensure a peaceful inauguration for the successor. This historical context highlights the significance of preventing attempts to disrupt the Electoral College process and the responsibility of outgoing presidents to secure a peaceful transition.
The “brothers-in-law” Vik and Akhil Amar have filed an amicus brief in Trump v. Anderson et al. The brief contains a dramatic historic episode that you almost certainly knew nothing about, and which is highly relevant - perhaps decisive - to the case. Prepare to be amazed by this story of the “First Insurrection,” which preceded and was distinguishable from the Civil War itself, and which makes clear the certain intent of the framers and ratifiers of the Fourteenth Amendment - and the course the Supreme Court should take in this case. This, and the episodes to follow, may be the most important episodes we have offered in the more than three years of this podcast. CLE credit is available from podcast.njsba.com.
Get the Snipd podcast app
Unlock the knowledge in podcasts with the podcast player of the future.
AI-powered podcast player
Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features
Discover highlights
Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode
Save any moment
Hear something you like? Tap your headphones to save it with AI-generated key takeaways
Share & Export
Send highlights to Twitter, WhatsApp or export them to Notion, Readwise & more
AI-powered podcast player
Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features
Discover highlights
Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode