PHOENIX — Jacob Chansley, who may be better known as the "QAnon Shaman," has filed a statement of interest to run for Arizona’s 8th Congressional District in Congress.
Chansley stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021 and pleaded guilty to obstruction of an official proceeding. He was originally sentenced in Nov. 2021 to 41 months in prison for his role in the Insurrection. He instead served about 27 months before being transferred to Phoenix in March 2023.
Chansley was described by prosecutors in his Jan. 6 trial as "the public face of the Capitol riot." He stood out from the rioters who stormed the Capitol, shirtless with a horned headdress at the dais where Vice President Pence had been presiding at the certification of the 2020 election.
As a felony convict, Chansley can run but not vote in the election.
How the fuck is anyone associated with Jan 6th not banned from holding any government job?
He was convicted and along with jail sentences, bans from all government institutions should have been included.
…same goes for the shitty orange man once he’s convicted.
Edit: a word
As a convicted felon, he’s barred from voting, but he can still run for office. FFS
That part is confusing AF. Like, he’s lost his right to chose government officials but still has the right to become one? What the actual fuck?!
I think the logic is so politicians can't just slap someone with a charge in a kangaroo court to block them from running as opposition.
Given how fucked up the ~~justice~~ punishment system is in this country, I can't say I don't agree with it, even if I hate it in situations like this.
And that logic somehow doesn't apply to the right to vote, which should never be removed ever.
~~14th Amendment, Section 3. He IS banned.~~ Edit: totally forgot prior oath of office requirement, dbag joined the US Navy prior and violated that oath, but wasn't holder of any office so section 3 wouldn't apply.
Enforcement of this law is the issue. There is no method or apparatus detailed in the amendment for enforcement, so this gets left to Secretaries of State or the Judiciary to make a ruling.
This is what is being litigated in multiple states for keeping Trump off the ballot.
That section specifies that people who have previously held office and sworn an oath to protect the constitution who have subsequently engaged in insurrection.
Oh fuckballs you're entirely correct and I'm dumb. I don't know why I struck that from my mind that the entire section required a previous oath.
No worrries. It seems like a good idea to prevent anyone engaged in insurrection against the US.
Agreed. The 14th needs clarification anyway with some "shall not be eligible" and details on how to define one having engaged in insurrection/rebellion (with or without convictions) so we just need a new amendment. Simple! ...D'oh.
Hopefully we get some good case law precedent out of the current state suits to give the 14th some teeth, even if it still wouldn't apply nationally or to this wacko.
Admitting you were wrong should allow double upvotes.
Because there wasn't a law in place and you don't get to make laws retroactively.
A better question might be, how do we address this sort of thing moving forward?
Insurrection act?
That's the 14th Amendment and only applies to people who took an oath.
"No person 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, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability."
John Q. Asshole can't be held accountable under this provision. We gotta play by the rules and the bullies don't. Sucks, but here we are.
Murrika.
I'm pretty sure "obstructing an official proceeding" doesn't and shouldn't ban anyone from holding office. He also shouldn't be banned from voting, but that is just a normal justice reform issue.