It should not be, because the interpretation of the term insurrection in the 14th for purposes of ballot exclusion should not be controlled by the use of the same word by a later Congress for a different purpose, criminal prosecution. The latter use could shed light of the former interpretation, but cannot by definition establish what th…
It should not be, because the interpretation of the term insurrection in the 14th for purposes of ballot exclusion should not be controlled by the use of the same word by a later Congress for a different purpose, criminal prosecution. The latter use could shed light of the former interpretation, but cannot by definition establish what the 14th's framers meant.
As to the "conviction" point, that word is used elsewhere in the Const. for various purposes, and it is reasonable to presume that the 14th's framers choice to use "engaged in" instead was deliberate.
It should not be, because the interpretation of the term insurrection in the 14th for purposes of ballot exclusion should not be controlled by the use of the same word by a later Congress for a different purpose, criminal prosecution. The latter use could shed light of the former interpretation, but cannot by definition establish what the 14th's framers meant.
As to the "conviction" point, that word is used elsewhere in the Const. for various purposes, and it is reasonable to presume that the 14th's framers choice to use "engaged in" instead was deliberate.