that the 2020 election was "stolen," is facing a legal challenge that experts say could bar him from holding office.says the North Carolina Republican should be disqualified from seeking re-election to Congress over his support for the Jan. 6 riot.
The legal debate hinges on a little-used Reconstruction-era clause in the U.S. Constitution, as well as a North Carolina law that lets voters or other candidates challenge the eligibility of candidates if they have a “reasonable suspicion” they should be disqualified. Chris Cooper, a political science professor at Western Carolina University, said it will be difficult for Cawthorn to get a judge to see things his way since the law has been in place and used for years.In court papers, the Board of Elections said it's heard 12 election challenges in the past four years. An NBC News review of the cases showed most dealt with residency issues. In two cases, candidates were disqualified.
The only time North Carolina disqualified a candidate for office based on the clause was in 1870, after a former Confederate colonel namedVance reclaimed the Senate seat in 1878, after President Ulysses S. Grant signed the Amnesty Act of 1872. Cawthorn's filing contends the Amnesty Act should extend to him as well.
The board also argued that Cawthorn's suit should be dismissed because the complaint against the 26-year-old congressman was put on pause pending the outcome of a"We don't know what district he'll be running in" at this point, Bitzer said.
can’t there simply be a choad disqualification?
Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: YahooNews - 🏆 380. / 59 Read more »
Source: Newsweek - 🏆 468. / 52 Read more »