"Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members"
Plainly, they decide whether that particular congressional election was valid. Not anyone else.
Impeachment is the only method of removing a sitting president. Otherwise, they serve 4 years, and there are no other means to remove them.
If election of President/Vice President were a statutory creation and not Constitutionally created, a case could be made under Article III that a court could use equitable powers to remedy this. But because it is not a creature arising from statute, there is no lawful way for any court to intervene here. Congress is where the buck stops.
So, if the fraud fooled our congress people, there is no recourse? Even if a foreign power infiltrated our ranks and cheated from the inside? No recourse. Hmm,
There's no mechanism in the Constitution for this. We don't have to like it, but wishing there was one doesn't write one in. Nor does a need manifest itself as an actuality.
But you are mistaken that fraud "fooled" congress. They knew damn good and well. Every single one of them was well aware. Many were in on it. The Constitution wasn't built to protect us from falling asleep and allowing an infiltration takeover by a corrupt cabal. It is precisely our own apathy that has allowed this to occur. This didn't occur overnight. It happened right under our own noses over decades.
We cannot realistically expect that the Constitution would contain provisions about how things should be handled in the event it had been violated. That is when the people sworn to uphold the Constitution defend it based on a higher law. ?
Typically when governments decay to the point where this type of corruption has taken over, that country's civil society is code blue. They either revolt, as we did from the British. Or they become subject to tyrannical rule, like we've seen in places like the Soviet Union, Mao's China, & Kim il Sung's Best Korea.
I have been actively seeking examples of military coups that turned out better than what they replaced. They are few and far between. Definitely the exception, and not the norm. Arguably, the Soviet "coup" in 1991 was an example. Even though the coup plotters were not in favor of the decentralization of the state. It failed. But that failure resulted in the failure of the USSR. Hard to argue that was a bad thing. Except that the military was going to preserve communism there; something that would have likely resulted in another Stalin-esque purge.
Egypt's coup of the muslim brotherhood might be a more modern example. I am not sure. I don't know enough about what has occurred there lately, and whether or not the generals are mostly running the place. But Egypt hasn't been in the news for being dysfunctional that I'm aware of.
All I know is that odds of seeing tanks and bradleys and apc's in our streets giving us relief from these people are not very good. And by the time they deploy, it will be too late to stop them. So if this ends up happening, its going to be a real shitty mess. Given that these same people we are hoping save us from this have also been watching this in real time for decades without acting, that doesn't make me feel warm and fuzzy...
Office matters. That's why I said it. "Elected office" is not one size fits all. Your county commissioner is not the same as your House representative. Your state senator is not the same as your US senator. The way you are trying to twist this, you could apply the same logic to any act being somehow of meaningful precedential value. The arrest of one pedo is "precedent" to arrest cabal pedos... a complete non sequitur when corruption is what shields them from prosecution.
People can petition the AG to institute Quo Warranto proceedings to remove unlawful office holders. If the AG refuses, people can file a request in DC district court to have any duly licensed attorney appointed to represent the United States before the court in this matter. Except the House/Senate/President/Vice President are exempt from this statute, because they exist as explicitly created by the Constitution. Which has its own framework for office qualifications & the process by which they assume office. None of which involve judges/courts/SCOTUS.
The legality of it matters, and the courts are the arbiters of the law. AG's are weak, as are most legislators. Fraudulent elections, are not constitutionally legal, regardless of the legal framework or precedent, or temporary allowance of such. They are in no way legal, as they alienate others from their constitutional right to representation. Courts at the federal court level, at the state court level and at the county level are all responsible for hearing cases brought forth by interested parties at the jurisdiction level appropriate level of government in which the fraud was perpetrated (County, state, federal).
You speak only in platitudes and cliches. At no point do you address anything I said. It is nothing more than "this is wrong, thus, someone can lawfully fix it." Simply not true. That isn't how it works.
First, you have no constitutional right to vote for president/vice president. The state legislatures could appoint electors directly without your input, and historically this has happened. Second, each house is responsible for judging the elections of their own members. If they want to act lawless and allow a fraudulently elected rep to serve their term, they act lawless. No judge can usurp that determination for them.
As I said before, you cannot bring suit to remove any federal office holder from unlawfully holding office anywhere but the DC circuit. And House/Senate/Pres/VP are exempt from this. Want to remove a sitting president? Impeach him. Otherwise, he serves the 4 year term. Want to remove a senator/congressman? Convince 2/3rds of that body to expel them. Otherwise, they serve their 6/2 year terms. State officials would vary based on the particular state's constitution.
The legality of it matters, and the courts are the arbiters of the law.
They already weighed in on this over the centuries. The answer is no, they can't do this no matter how mad you are about it, and no matter how badly you want them to.
Not of house/senate/president/vice president.
Article I § 5 cl. 1
"Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members"
Plainly, they decide whether that particular congressional election was valid. Not anyone else.
Impeachment is the only method of removing a sitting president. Otherwise, they serve 4 years, and there are no other means to remove them.
If election of President/Vice President were a statutory creation and not Constitutionally created, a case could be made under Article III that a court could use equitable powers to remedy this. But because it is not a creature arising from statute, there is no lawful way for any court to intervene here. Congress is where the buck stops.
So, if the fraud fooled our congress people, there is no recourse? Even if a foreign power infiltrated our ranks and cheated from the inside? No recourse. Hmm,
There's no mechanism in the Constitution for this. We don't have to like it, but wishing there was one doesn't write one in. Nor does a need manifest itself as an actuality.
But you are mistaken that fraud "fooled" congress. They knew damn good and well. Every single one of them was well aware. Many were in on it. The Constitution wasn't built to protect us from falling asleep and allowing an infiltration takeover by a corrupt cabal. It is precisely our own apathy that has allowed this to occur. This didn't occur overnight. It happened right under our own noses over decades.
We cannot realistically expect that the Constitution would contain provisions about how things should be handled in the event it had been violated. That is when the people sworn to uphold the Constitution defend it based on a higher law. ?
Typically when governments decay to the point where this type of corruption has taken over, that country's civil society is code blue. They either revolt, as we did from the British. Or they become subject to tyrannical rule, like we've seen in places like the Soviet Union, Mao's China, & Kim il Sung's Best Korea.
I have been actively seeking examples of military coups that turned out better than what they replaced. They are few and far between. Definitely the exception, and not the norm. Arguably, the Soviet "coup" in 1991 was an example. Even though the coup plotters were not in favor of the decentralization of the state. It failed. But that failure resulted in the failure of the USSR. Hard to argue that was a bad thing. Except that the military was going to preserve communism there; something that would have likely resulted in another Stalin-esque purge.
Egypt's coup of the muslim brotherhood might be a more modern example. I am not sure. I don't know enough about what has occurred there lately, and whether or not the generals are mostly running the place. But Egypt hasn't been in the news for being dysfunctional that I'm aware of.
All I know is that odds of seeing tanks and bradleys and apc's in our streets giving us relief from these people are not very good. And by the time they deploy, it will be too late to stop them. So if this ends up happening, its going to be a real shitty mess. Given that these same people we are hoping save us from this have also been watching this in real time for decades without acting, that doesn't make me feel warm and fuzzy...
Again, I stated no specific office. You did.
Office matters. That's why I said it. "Elected office" is not one size fits all. Your county commissioner is not the same as your House representative. Your state senator is not the same as your US senator. The way you are trying to twist this, you could apply the same logic to any act being somehow of meaningful precedential value. The arrest of one pedo is "precedent" to arrest cabal pedos... a complete non sequitur when corruption is what shields them from prosecution.
People can petition the AG to institute Quo Warranto proceedings to remove unlawful office holders. If the AG refuses, people can file a request in DC district court to have any duly licensed attorney appointed to represent the United States before the court in this matter. Except the House/Senate/President/Vice President are exempt from this statute, because they exist as explicitly created by the Constitution. Which has its own framework for office qualifications & the process by which they assume office. None of which involve judges/courts/SCOTUS.
The mechanism in this instance would be mass revolt from the states.
This is, unfortunately, unlikely at this juncture.
The legality of it matters, and the courts are the arbiters of the law. AG's are weak, as are most legislators. Fraudulent elections, are not constitutionally legal, regardless of the legal framework or precedent, or temporary allowance of such. They are in no way legal, as they alienate others from their constitutional right to representation. Courts at the federal court level, at the state court level and at the county level are all responsible for hearing cases brought forth by interested parties at the jurisdiction level appropriate level of government in which the fraud was perpetrated (County, state, federal).
You speak only in platitudes and cliches. At no point do you address anything I said. It is nothing more than "this is wrong, thus, someone can lawfully fix it." Simply not true. That isn't how it works.
First, you have no constitutional right to vote for president/vice president. The state legislatures could appoint electors directly without your input, and historically this has happened. Second, each house is responsible for judging the elections of their own members. If they want to act lawless and allow a fraudulently elected rep to serve their term, they act lawless. No judge can usurp that determination for them.
As I said before, you cannot bring suit to remove any federal office holder from unlawfully holding office anywhere but the DC circuit. And House/Senate/Pres/VP are exempt from this. Want to remove a sitting president? Impeach him. Otherwise, he serves the 4 year term. Want to remove a senator/congressman? Convince 2/3rds of that body to expel them. Otherwise, they serve their 6/2 year terms. State officials would vary based on the particular state's constitution.
They already weighed in on this over the centuries. The answer is no, they can't do this no matter how mad you are about it, and no matter how badly you want them to.