What’s Old is New Again🤣😂🤣
(twitter.com)
Comments (15)
sorted by:
Trump must be beaming with pride. I'm sure Barron lurks here and probably posts.
This is not Barron's account. Its a news account run by some anon
But yes agree with your first statement
Either way I assume since we're all posting hard about it Trumps team is looking at it and saying "no shit, this is not going to happen".
Kill a commie for mommy...
This catches some big fish. John Brennan for instance.
Enforcing existing laws is all it takes and a majority if not all our problems would be solved or lessened to a significate degree!!!
Which is why Soros puts his own people as judges and DAs. Is there a law if no one can enforce it?
Oh this will make libtards scream!! Let’s do it!!
Bernie Sanders comes to mind!
Love this! Let's go POTUS!!!!! MAGA
I've been saying this since project veritas unmasked that commie CA teacher like six years ago. I keep waiting, but I have yet to see Trump do something.
Wouldn't that mean that bernie sanders would have to be removed from government?
🤣🤣🤣
Is it really still law? I thought they amended it?
This is one of many reasons that we love this young man! The kid is a natural!
I, too, would like to see this enforced, but here are the facts:
There are no known cases in which the Communist Control Act of 1954 (CCA) was successfully used to secure a criminal conviction that survived appellate review. However, there was one major instance where the government attempted to apply the Act, but the effort failed under judicial scrutiny:
Notable Case: Blawis v. Bolin, 358 F. Supp. 349 (D. Ariz. 1973)
Facts: In 1972, a Communist Party candidate for the U.S. Senate, Steve Blawis, attempted to run in Arizona.
Arizona’s Secretary of State, Wesley Bolin, refused to place his name on the ballot, citing the Communist Control Act as justification—arguing that the CPUSA was an illegal organization and thus ineligible to appear on the ballot.
Ruling: The U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona ruled in favor of Blawis, holding that the Communist Control Act was unconstitutional as applied.
The court stated the Act violated the First and Fifth Amendments, including freedom of association, due process, and equal protection.
Quote from the ruling: "The Communist Control Act of 1954 is an unconstitutional infringement upon the First Amendment right of freedom of association."
Significance: Although not a criminal prosecution, this was a direct judicial rebuke of the CCA's enforceability.
The court made it clear that even the denial of ballot access under the Act was unconstitutional.
Summary:
Attempted Use: Yes, in Blawis v. Bolin (1973)
Successful Prosecution: No
Judicial Outcome: Communist Control Act declared unconstitutional in practice.
The Department of Justice essentially abandoned any further enforcement of the Act after this and similar constitutional setbacks. The Act has since remained a dead letter law: unenforced, judicially discredited, and politically obsolete.