House Republicans are exploring ways to prevent Zohran Mamdani from ever being sworn in as mayor even if he prevails in Tuesday’s election by using the Constitution’s “insurrection clause,” The Post has learned.

The New York Young Republican Club is pushing to prevent the NYC mayoral frontrunner from taking the oath of office Jan. 1 under an idea floated this summer.

It cites language in the post-Civil War 14th Amendment to the Constitution barring from office anyone who “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” or who has “given aid or comfort to the enemies.” The group argues that Mamdani’s own statements calling to resist ICE could violate the prohibition.

It’s the same provision Colorado used to try to kick Trump off the ballot last year, only to get slapped down by the Supreme Court. The high court ruled that it was up to Congress to enforcement the amendment, giving majority Republicans a chance to test their authority.

    • SanctimoniousApe@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      39
      ·
      5 days ago

      They see it, but don’t care. They’re in control, and are going to do every fucking absurd thing they can do to keep it since they have the Supreme Court rubber-stamping everything for them. It’s an all or nothing bet on maintaining power. They’re not that stupid, they’re just cravenly doing everything they can while they can to solidify their power.

      • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        ·
        5 days ago

        I’ll just keep posting this quote on the topic.

        'If conservatives become convinced that they can not win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. The will reject democracy."

    • ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      To be clear, this is what I assume you’re referring to:

      It cites language in the post-Civil War 14th Amendment to the Constitution barring from office anyone who “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” or who has “given aid or comfort to the enemies.” The group argues that Mamdani’s own statements calling to resist ICE could violate the prohibition.

      To them, there is no irony because they think anyone challenging their power or ideologically inconsistent with them is an insurrection or rebellion.

        • bufalo1973@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          4 days ago
          • Would you vote for someone that did XYZ?
          • Fuck, no! That guy should be in jail!
          • Trump did XYZ. Would you still vote for him?
          • Yes.

          That’s the level of hypocrisy.

          • Bonesince1997@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            5 days ago

            Challenging them means insurrection to them. That it was charged against them, to them, means that they get to do it back. Or, at least muddy the idea to where it seems like everyone is charging everyone else with it in a hope to make it not matter. The only insurrection I’ve seen so far was Jan 6th. They should be embarrassed, but they won’t let it set in.