ATLANTIC INTERVIEW ARTICLE WITH TWO MEMBERS OF THE FEDERALIST SOCIETY Yes I’ve r

ATLANTIC INTERVIEW ARTICLE WITH TWO MEMBERS OF THE FEDERALIST SOCIETY
Yes I’ve read the opinions verbally stated by two members. But scholars are public intellectuals that provide opinions – they are not oracles. Me included.
There is a bit of an argument to be made that the terms of insurrection have been changed over time, especially in regard to the civil war. But he reverses the meaning of insurrection and rebellion to get away with it – which I find a bit humorous.
The next argument equates the circumstances of the civil war where the 14th was enacted (and should have sunset as it’s the most controversial amendment) in order to force the south into compliance and reconstruction. There is no other legislative device for creating legislation, adding competitors to the congress, and preventing the new merged congress from reversing the legislation that constituted the terms of their inclusion. So that doesn’t hold.
Otherwise, it’s a bit of thinking out loud, but there are no arguments in that discussion I wouldn’t much through like a can of pringles at a college frat party watching a game.
I have, my organization has, an advantage in that we have strictly constsructed the law, and we are not easily misled by the 20th century innovations in skirting the law.

Reply addressees: @sqpatrick77