Laurence Tribe

@tribelaw ↗

Deleted No

Hibernated No

Last Checked Jan. 6, 2023

Created

Tue Dec 20 04:26:13 +0000 2022

Likes

197

Retweets

Source

Twitter for iPhone

View Raw Data

JSON Data

View on Twitter

Likely Available

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

The precedents from 1946 (Lovett) and 1965 (Brown) reflect what I take to be the current meaning of the attainder ban. I see no coherent way to make sense of the Constitution’s structure, including the Impeachment Clauses, otherwise. — PolitiTweet.org

2) they would not amount to a bill of attainder?

Posted Dec. 20, 2022

Preceded By

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

Of course conviction of insurrection would disqualify pursuant to 14A3, There’s no bill of attainder problem if a COURT finds Jan 6 was an insurrection and Trump incited or aided it. No “trial by legislature” in that instance. — PolitiTweet.org

Raskin was the headline. And headline of his statement was the explanation of 2383 and reference to 14th Am sec 3… https://t.co/N4u8yKX84S

Posted Dec. 20, 2022

Followed By

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

My thoughts on this are straightforward: The fact that 14A3 says insurrectionists are disqualified doesn’t mean the Bill of Rights or the rights protected by Art I Sec 9 are erased by that general rule. — PolitiTweet.org

8. Thoughts, @tribelaw ? (can't believe I can just write that, from a pisher commentator to the country's most em… https://t.co/uTwATDnOl9

Posted Dec. 20, 2022