Thanks for reading and commenting! I don't agree that I'm advocating Judicial activism. It's actually the opposite, I am advocating that they shouldn't be the deciding factor, that it should be left to Congress to define the meaning of "insurrection" and describe the mechanism of enforcement of the 14th Amendment; and that they leave it up to the States to decide who meets their criteria to be on their ballots. In my mind, this is quintessential judicial restraint.
Although your conclusion advocates the Judicial activism so recently decried by many conservatives.
Interpretations have good am not so good effects depending whether they benefit the people or the powerful.
Thanks for reading and commenting! I don't agree that I'm advocating Judicial activism. It's actually the opposite, I am advocating that they shouldn't be the deciding factor, that it should be left to Congress to define the meaning of "insurrection" and describe the mechanism of enforcement of the 14th Amendment; and that they leave it up to the States to decide who meets their criteria to be on their ballots. In my mind, this is quintessential judicial restraint.
Ok with that.