Licencia Creative Commons

Showing posts with label ESTADOS UNIDOS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ESTADOS UNIDOS. Show all posts

Monday, March 4, 2024

TRIBUNAL SUPREMO DE ESTADOS UNIDOS (4/03/2024): LOS ESTADOS NO PUEDEN EXCLUIR A TRUMP COMO CANDIDATO (I)


The Supreme Court on Monday ruled that states cannot disqualify former President Donald Trump from the ballot for his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attacks on the U.S. Capitol. In an unsigned opinion, a majority of the justices held that only Congress – and not the states – can enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which was enacted in the wake of the Civil War to disqualify individuals from holding office who had previously served in the federal or state government before the war but then supported the Confederacy, against candidates for federal offices.  

All nine justices agreed that Colorado cannot remove Trump from the ballot. But four justices – Justice Amy Coney Barrett in a separate opinion and Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson in a joint opinion – argued that their colleagues should have stopped there and not decided anything more.

The court’s decision comes just one day before Super Tuesday, when 16 states and one territory will hold their primary elections. Trump currently holds an overwhelming lead in the race for the Republican nomination.

The dispute leading to Monday’s opinion began last year in a state court in Colorado. A group of voters in that state argued that Trump was ineligible to appear on the ballot under Section 3, which provides (as relevant here) that no one “shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State,” if that person had previously sworn, “as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States,” to support the Constitution but then “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against the federal government.

A state trial court concluded that Trump had “engaged in insurrection,” but it rejected the voters’ request to remove him from the ballot. The presidency, that court ruled, is not an “office … under the United States,” and the president is not an “officer of the United States.”

The voters appealed to the Colorado Supreme Court, which agreed that Trump is ineligible to appear on the ballot under Section 3. But that court put its ruling on hold to give Trump time to go to the Supreme Court, which agreed early this year to weigh in.

In a 13-page unsigned opinion released shortly after 10 a.m., the justices reversed the state supreme court’s decision. The justices explained that the 14th Amendment was intended to expand the federal government’s power at the states’ expense. And in particular, they noted, Section 3 was designed to “help ensure an enduring Union by preventing former Confederates from returning to power in the aftermath of the Civil War.”

But before disqualifying someone under Section 3, the justices observed, there must be a determination that the provision actually applies to that person. And Section 5 of the 14th Amendment gives the power to make that determination to Congress, by authorizing it to pass “appropriate legislation” to “enforce” the 14th Amendment. Nothing in the 14th Amendment, the court stressed, gives states the power to enforce Section 3 against candidates for federal office, nor was there any history of states doing so in the years after the amendment was ratified.ke that determination to Congress, by authorizing it to pass “appropriate 

 Monday’s decision comes less than a week after the justices agreed to take up another case involving the former president. On Wednesday, the justices announced that they will hear argument in late April on whether Trump can be tried on charges that he conspired to overturn the results of the 2020 election. That decision is expected by late June or early July.

 

Wednesday, September 21, 2022

INFORME SOBRE EL ORIGEN DEL COVID-19 ENVIADO AL SENADO Y CONGRESO DE ESTADOS UNIDOS (12-09-2022)

 

 

"Report about the REAL Origin of SARS-CoV2 sent to the US Senate and Congress last week

 I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct.

 Executed On (Date): ______________ Signature: ______________________ 

Andrew G. Huff, Ph.D., M.S."


September 12, 2022

Donald Trump, Senator Ron Johnson, Senator Rand Paul, Rep. Jim Jordan, and others were right. As early as late April or early May of 2020 former President Trump spoke of the creation of SARS-COV2 in a lab in Wuhan, China. Since that time both the investigation and the cover-up have continued but the evidence provided herein clearly demonstrate that SARS-COV2was indeed created in a lab in Wuhan China by EcoHealth Alliance and with funding fromAnthony Fauci’s NIH/NIAID.

Evidence included herein demonstrate the following key points (amongst others):

1. SARS-COV2 was created in the lab in Wuhan, China;

2. Anthony Fauci funded the creation of SARS-COV2 and lied to Congress about funding Gain-of-Function work;

3. The US Intelligence Community was aware of and appeared to have been involved with the funding of said Gain-of-Function work;

4. A number of well-connected public and private partners were involved in the Gain-of-

Function work that resulted in the creation and release of SARS-COV2;

5. Anthony Fauci and others coordinated to cover-up the funding of the Gain-of-Function

work that resulted in SARS-COV2.

 

Given the recent high-profile criminal enforcement actions taken by Congress and the DoJ, we expect immediate investigations will see bi-partisan support in light of this newly compiled information. Renz Law and Make Americans Free Again (MAFA) will provide any and all support possible in such investigations and prosecutions. Further, with the additional high-profile revelations that certain segments of the government have promoted censoring this information, presumably as part of this same cover-up, we will voluntarily support any good-faith efforts by the media to correct the record.

As has been the case since early in the pandemic, Renz Law and MAFA will continue to seek truth and justice in this matter for all that have been impacted by the worst man-made pandemic in human history.

Sincerely,

 

Thomas Renz

Renz Law, LLC

 

Sunday, June 23, 2013

SÏ ESPIAMOS, YES WE SCAN


Los medios reproducen con la mayor naturalidad las interceptaciones masivas de las comunicaciones electrónicas

Una de sus funciones es la de la "banalización del mal", de este en concreto y de todos los demás

No es verdad, sin embargo, como apenas mencionan, que las mismas sean legales

Al menos no lo eran en un pasado bien próximo, como consta en las siguientes noticias y casos aquí publicados

YOU CAN'T , WE CAN, 
YES WE SCAN

Sunday, January 22, 2012

SOPA AND PIPA, UN EXAMEN TECNICO

Sunday, June 15, 2008

LOS RASTREOS POLICIALES EN INTERNET SEGUN LA SENTENCIA DE LA SALA DE LO PENAL DEL TRIBUNAL SUPREMO DE 9 DE MAYO DE 2008

Saturday, July 5, 2008

LA SUPERVISION GENERALIZADA DE LAS TELECOMUNICACIONES SEGUN EL TRIBUNAL EUROPEO DE DERECHOS HUMANOS

Thursday, July 20, 2006

LA INTERCEPTACION MASIVA DE LAS COMUNICACIONES ELECTRONICAS EN LOS ESTADOS UNIDOS DESPUES DE HAMDANCONTRA RUMSFELD

Monday, August 28, 2006

ACLU CONTRA NSA: LA JUEZ TAYLOR DECLARA INCONSTITUCIONAL EL PROGRAMA PRESIDENCIAL DE INTERCEPTACION MASIVA DE LAS COMUNICACIONES ELECTRONICAS EN USA

Sunday, January 15, 2006

LA INTERCEPTACION DE COMUNICACIONES ELECTRONICAS POR LA NSA EN LOS ESTADOS UNIDOS