The constitutional case for keeping Democratic Socialists of America members out of office.
After the New York and New Jersey Democratic primaries, it now seems likely that the next freshman class of the House will include Dariazila Avila Chevalier, a Muslim convert who co-founded an organization that tweeted “Death to America” and who bragged, “I forgot to get napkins so I just wiped my hand on the American flag” as well as Hisham ‘Adam’ Hamawy: an associate of the Blind Sheikh terrorist leader who testified on his behalf at his terror trial.
The success of DSA (Democratic Socialists of America) candidates with Marxist and Communist views (Dariazila appears to have also praised Stalin) has captured headlines even as most people, including those in Congress, have forgotten what happened the first time a socialist won a House seat.
In 1919, the House voted 309-1 not to seat Rep. Victor L. Berger (pictured above), the first socialist congressman, based on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress” if they “shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”
It was WWI and Berger’s Marxist rag was anti-war. “The one and only issue in this case is that of Americanism,” the House Special Committee that excluded Berger found. “It is whether a man who in 1911 took an oath as a member of the House to support the Constitution of the United States and who, when this country declared war against the Imperial German Government, became the head and front of an organized conspiracy to hinder, obstruct, and embarrass the Government in its fight for existence, should be admitted to membership in this House simply because a constituency in one of our States has seen fit to give him a plurality of its vote.”
Berger’s Socialist Party of America splintered into two parties, one of them, the Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee, whose red rose symbol is carried on by its successor, the Democratic Socialists of America or the DSA that is currently taking over the Democrats.
Some might dismiss this as ancient history, a WWI proceeding based on a Civil War amendment, but it was the Democrats who decided to revive it in recent years, citing Berger’s case, among others, during their campaign to bar President Trump and pro-Trump members of Congress from running for reelection.
The Colorado Supreme Court even excluded Trump from the ballot election based on Section 3 (the Disqualification Clause) of the 14th Amendment only to be overridden by the Supreme Court of the United States. This was part of a sustained effort to revive post-war legislation aimed at ex-Confederates and the KKK against Trump and Republicans.
While these efforts failed to achieve their goal, the 14th Amendment and some of the acts passed after the Civil War remain ticking time bombs that can be used to ban the opposition. And if Democrats and leftists achieve legislative and judicial majorities, they will revive efforts to treat J6 as an ‘insurrection’, to bar anyone who expressed support for it from public office, to prosecute anyone who holds public office and supports Trump, and to extend that to the GOP.
It would be naively optimistic to imagine that the same two-tier legal machinery that was used to hand out tough prison sentences to abortion protesters or to label the J6 protests as an insurrection while cheering on BLM and anti-ICE riots as expressions of free speech could not and would not be used to outlaw the opposition and fundamentally transform the political system.
But unlike the attempts to weaponize the Disqualification Clause against Trump or the WW! overreach of anti-war prosecutions that ultimately kept Berger out of prison and eventually allowed him back into Congress, the case for not seating DSA and other radicals is fairly clear.
There is already ample evidence against Rep. Ilhan Omar, Rep Rashida Tlaib and others from their own statements. The main defect to a Disqualification Clause case against Avila or Hisham is that the 14th Amendment only applies to elected officials who had taken an oath before their acts of treason, but that can be easily remedied once they are already in office.
And Congressional leaders can simply choose to ask Dariazila Avila Chevalier if she regrets having created an organization that called for “Death to America” or the destruction of western civilization, and whether those are still part of her goals, and see if she lies or doesn’t. Thus far, she’s thrown out gibberish word salads, even when asked if she was a Communist (despite her past Communist social media activity) rather than specifically disavowing individual positions.
Before she’s seated, she and other DSA members should at least be asked about their past statements and their membership in a political organization run by Marxists and Communists.
In Berger’s case, the House Committee on Elections declined to seat him and passed the matter on to a Special Committee. The basis for Berger’s exclusion was, among other things, a Socialist Party program that called for “resistance” to the government’s war policies. This constituted giving “aid and comfort” to the nation’s enemies in a time of war. Citing the Constitution, that “Each House shall be the judge of the elections, returns, and qualifications of its own Members”, the Special Committee found that “under this provision of the Constitution, the House of Representatives has always maintained its absolute right to exclude
Members-elect and to prevent their taking the oath of office.”
Can this be applied to leftists and their ‘resistance’ activities on behalf of international and foreign domestic terrorists? Democrats themselves made the case after J6 that domestic political opposition and protests could constitute insurrection, which the Colorado Supreme Court defined as “(1) a public use of force or threat of force (2) by a group of people (3) to hinder or prevent execution of the Constitution of the United States”. This would handily cover anti-ICE and riots on behalf of Islamic terrorists aimed at preventing the execution of presidential powers as enumerated in the Constitution of the United States.
The legal pathway isn’t a simple one. The Democrat efforts to revive the Disqualification Clause ran into questions such as whether it even applies today or was limited in application to the Confederates, and whether it was neutered by an amnesty later handed out by Congress, but as the disqualification proceedings against Berger noted, Congress alone has the power to decide who can and can’t be seated, entirely apart from any outside legal proceedings.
If that power to decide who can and can’t be seated, can’t be utilized against a Communist whose organization called for “Death to America,” whom can it be used against?
“The one and only issue in this case is that of Americanism.” Do we allow open enemies to be seated in Congress or do we, at the most basic minimum, exclude those who want to destroy the United States of America?
somehistory says
Could Mr. Greenfield send letters to enough members to remind them of their duty to keep such vermin from sitting next to them and voting to make the government of the U.S. an enemy of the people?
David Lakatos says
Keep them out.
Frank Anderson says
The US Supreme Court prohibited challenging an elected official for lack of sincerity in taking the oath of office in the case Bond v. Floyd.
The oath has no meaning other than to mark the accession to office. The official must be caught breaking any law before being removed.
Their thinking. Not mine.
Wellington says
In addition to the 14th Amendment, there is Article I, Section 5 in the body of the original Constitution itself which states that “Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members….” Moreover, further on in said section of Article I it states that each House can expel a member if two thirds of that House votes to do so.
Thus, there is constitutional “opportunity” to not seat any of the DSA members who make it into Congress even without any 14th Amendment application, though I doubt enough from either major party will have the backbone to do so, the Democrats being even worse than the Republicans in this regard though the Republicans are bad enough.
My God, we are now on the verge of many more true enemies of America being not only right outside the gate but inside the gate. Yes, it’s come to this. Man never learns, even in the greatest polity of all time.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
I just wonder: if a majority of Americans vote in people who hate this country, then does it really deserve to exist? It’s been said that people get the governments they deserve: an extension of that would be that a country cannot be better than what its people are
I get what Daniel wants, but somehow, I can’t endorse depriving the general public of the right to vote in communists if that’s what they really want. Otoh, as Andrew Wilkow pointed out, people vote their way into communism and shoot their way out of it (Colombia and much of Latin America recently have been a welcome departure from that trend). I recall the 2016 Democrat primaries, which were stolen from Bernie, and much as I hated the 🇺🇸-flag burning and the 🇵🇸-flag waving, I opposed stealing that election from Bernie. Not b’cos I support Bernie, but b’cos I was similarly against the GOP establishment trying to steal the election from Trump on the other side
Problem is that by now, a huge percentage of the population has been born since 1990, when the Soviet Union fell, so there aren’t that many countries where communism in its original form is still the practice (China has a Fascist, rather than a communist economy, and a Maoist regime as far as party control goes). So they have no clue about what the Soviet Union or Eastern European countries like East Germany or Czechoslovakia or Yugoslavia really were. Which wouldn’t have been a problem had history been taught, but it isn’t
So people entering the work force experience amoral corporation doing things that aren’t remotely close to what 19th & 20th century capitalists used to do: care for the communities in which they lived. Ironically, these companies do better fit the caricatures of capitalists that Marxists used to draw. Combine that w/ the fact that they have no clue about what went on under the likes of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Brezhnev, Deng Xiao Ping and Pol Pot, and it perfectly explains why communism is a fad in the West these days
Hope you enjoy this country’s 250th anniversary tomorrow
tgusa says
“I can’t endorse depriving the general public of the right to vote in communists if that’s what they really want.”
That is illegal in the USA.
The Communist Control Act of 1954, signed by President Dwight Eisenhower, outlawed the Communist Party USA and criminalized membership or support for the party or related organizations, labeling them as instruments of a conspiracy to overthrow the U.S. government
50 U.S.C. §§ 841–844
The Communist Control Act of 1954 has not been fully repealed, though most of its enforcement provisions have been dismantled.
Looks like they had it right way back in 1954.
Beans🫘 says
Wow. Comment if the week. You made my day with that one. Did not know this.
gravenimage says
Thanks, Tgusa.
tgusa says
Your welcome. The sane democrats (if there are any) have a way out of their mess. All they have to do is use the Communist Control Act. But will they, do they have it in them to save themselves? It is not as if they are known for their bravery.
Hindu American says
This is what you get when less than 30% of the electorate takes the time out of their so-called busy lives to come out to vote.
Case in point – NYC.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Sorry, but NYC has had a major demographic shift. Even if 90% came out and voted, you’d still have had a mayor Mamdani. The New Yorkers who used to vote for Rudy and even Bloomberg have either
⮞ Died due to 9/11 related ailments
⮞ Died due to Covid-19
⮞ Moved out to other states, mainly Florida, or left the country
On top of that, there would have needed to be an untarnished Democrat who could have challenged Mamdani. Not Cuomo, who sent thousands of New Yorkers to their deaths. I wouldn’t for a moment blame New Yorkers for reacting like Janice Dean and refusing to fill in the bubble for Cuomo
Beans🫘 says
Infidel
You are correct. Mamdani had an extremely high approval rating. Most of New York voters are foreigners, as is most of its population. Muslim voters are a major major factor because they vote in very high proportions.
Muslims are smart. Their policy demand is simply show me the money. Don’t tell me , show me my free money. Show me the grants. Show me the sharia.
Huh?!? says
When I was a small boy growing up in the U.S., I was taught the stunts these people are pilling would be considered treason. Now we are intellectualizing this unto the death of our country. Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition. Vote! Vote! Vote! I would also add to write your state, local and federal reps.
tgusa says
“Congress Should Not Seat America’s Enemies”
Absolutely right. Just because the democrats and their big tent party allowed in enemies far and wide, (as long as they they promised to vote democrat) within their own big tent party doesn’t mean the rest of the American people have to take it. Some are making a big deal about this. It is a small minority. This is America 2026 not Russia 1917. Everything in the USA today is vastly different and better from 1917 USA. Because of the USA everything is vastly better even in communist countries that hate us.
Bean🫘 says
WHY TUCKER IS ON TEAM ISLAM:
https://www.youtube.com/live/ebXaCN5yNug?si=Gn3UPSicFbXLh1Ig
We here on jihadwatch have all been theorizing on this. This is the best explanation I have seen so far. He is following Alexander Dugin.
tgusa says
And So Happy Birthday USA, 250 years of dealing with adversary both within and without. If these new guys think we would roll over they should read our history. In the years before WWII Americans were peaceful and wanted to stay out of it but we all know how that worked out. Yes there are a few times in our history where an adversary provoked us to the point were we had to respond. Oh well. We should take this 250th Independence Day and say, America for Americans, against all enemies, nothing less.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Yeah, hope you & everyone else here had a great 4th of July tonight 🇺🇸2⃣5⃣0⃣
gravenimage says
+1
tgusa says
To you as well, American.
“If these new guys think we would roll over they should read our history. In the years before WWII Americans were peaceful and wanted to stay out of it but we all know how that worked out. Yes there are a few times in our history where an adversary provoked us to the point were we had to respond.”
Our bloodiest war in our history was between ourselves. No, we are not going to roll over.
tgusa says
Ragged Old Flag, Johnny Cash. First heard in 1974.
https://youtu.be/-KqrjeScLSI?si=0X1ke59ow7JI7nqu
Michelle Obama once said “all this for a damn flag”? Yes, indeed it is angry Michelle.
tgusa says
There are later and better recordings of Ragged Old Flag. Newer tech, better sound, better visuals, etc.
https://youtu.be/H0rkiwmB13I?si=Y_ZM54wByOmZxCyZ
tgusa says
Let the democrats fight it out among themselves. They started it they should have to deal with it.
Mockingjay says
Ok, so if it’s possible not to seat these hate/destroy our country communists, does Mike Johnson have the courage to act? My gut tells me no.
Frank Anderson says
They must be caught in the act of breaking existing law. Their treacherous and treasonous proclamations do not deprive them of the right to be elected. But actions after being elected can bring them down. Search “Dollar Bill Jefferson” from Louisiana. The US Supreme Court ruled that way by my reading and understanding in the case of Bond v. Floyd. The case is available online for free.