• Jimbob0i0@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean when even the federalist society are penning their opinions on various publications supporting such a position…

      • gac11@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Isn’t the opposite true though as well? Can’t red states just make up reasons to remove biden if a conviction isn’t required?

        • ganksy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          It is insurrection specific so states would have the burden of proving (if they cared about proof) Biden was engaged with an insurrection.

        • agentsquirrel@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Sure, if they could identify an instance in which he “engaged in insurrection or rebellion […], or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof”. Biden has never committed such an offense, so in order for red states to attempt this they’d have to fabricate facts and have a sufficient number of state officials go along with it, essentially The Big Lie 2.0.