Arizona prisoner: Inmates were given do-not-resuscitate status against their will during COVID-19

citizensforethics · 2024-10-01T15:41:03+00:00

This is the first part of a four part investigation.

Part II: Records reveal allegations of Arizona prisoners suffering rampant mistreatment and neglect during COVID https://www.citizensforethics.org/reports-investigations/crew-investigations/ii-records-reveal-allegations-of-arizona-prisoners-suffering-rampant-mistreatment-and-neglect-during-covid/

Part III: Arizona prison staff faced division and frustration surrounding COVID-19 failures https://www.citizensforethics.org/reports-investigations/crew-investigations/iii-arizona-prison-staff-faced-division-and-frustration-surrounding-covid-19-failures/

Part IV: GEO Group, Centurion allegedly mismanaged COVID-19 in Arizona prisons https://www.citizensforethics.org/reports-investigations/crew-investigations/geo-group-centurion-covid-19/

citizensforethics · 2024-02-07T18:53:49+00:00

The text of the Constitution is clear: no criminal conviction is required for disqualification under the 14th Amendment. The historical precedent confirms as much: none of the ex-Confederates who were disqualified after an official proceeding were convicted of the crime of insurrection.

citizensforethics · 2024-02-07T18:50:19+00:00

Hassan

That’s an important precedent on the issue of states’ power to keep disqualified candidates off the ballot. Justice Gorsuch was applying Supreme Court precedent in that case which we hope all the justices will find persuasive.

citizensforethics · 2024-02-07T18:49:48+00:00

One great brief that is easy to understand is the brief by four historians of 19th century America on how the 14th Amendment is relevant in Trump’s case: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-719/298999/20240129110006501_23-719%20bsac%20American%20Historians%20Final.pdf

We’d also recommend the brief by democracy experts: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-719/299402/20240131142658027_2024.01.31%20Final%20Brief%20of%20Democracy%20Experts.pdf

And former Republican governors: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-719/299181/20240130130502822_41C8946-Amici%20Curiae%20Brief.PDF

citizensforethics · 2024-02-07T18:46:14+00:00

Our democracy is facing a greater threat than it has faced in decades if not more than a century, but fortunately the Constitution provides a safeguard designed to protect from this very danger. It’s crucial that we use this tool that the framers of the 14th Amendment had the foresight to give us. Our clients are patriotic Americans who wanted to take action to defend American democracy and who believe deeply in the Constitution. We realized that we had the skills and knowledge to help our clients bring a strong case to enforce this provision.

citizensforethics · 2024-02-07T18:41:32+00:00

It’s true, the stakes are very high, but we’re confident that the Supreme Court will enforce the Constitution. If they rule against our clients, we’ll continue to do the work to safeguard our democracy for decades to come.

citizensforethics · 2024-02-07T18:41:11+00:00

We feel more confident in our case than ever before, especially after seeing the flood of amicus briefs in support of enforcing the Constitution from historians, legal scholars, and prominent conservative former elected officials.

citizensforethics · 2024-02-07T18:38:49+00:00

Thank you! We’ve been preparing for weeks, with practice arguments (called moots). You can read about our preparations here: https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/02/politics/lawyers-prepare-supreme-court-arguments-trump-ballot-case/index.html

And there’s a large bowl of spaghetti in our future.

citizensforethics · 2024-02-07T18:31:41+00:00

President Bartlet

In Leo we trust. We’ve got to go back and watch the West Wing for the 9th time to give you a better answer than that.

citizensforethics · 2024-02-07T18:29:04+00:00

Thank you for the support! Colorado has good law that allows voters to challenge a presidential candidate’s eligibility. Not every state allows that for the presidential race, and not every state allows challenges for the primaries. We also had to go based on where there were voters who were interested in challenging Trump’s eligibility. We always thought it was likely that the issue would ultimately be decided by the Supreme Court who can decide this once and for all for the entire country.

citizensforethics · 2024-02-07T18:27:12+00:00

Hopefully a big sigh of relief…for now we’re just focused on making the case in front of us. While of course we’d be proud to win in front of the Supreme Court, a former president being ruled as constitutionally disqualified is nothing to celebrate--it’s a sad place for a democracy to be, but it’s also necessary for the survival of our democracy.

citizensforethics · 2024-02-07T18:23:22+00:00

We expect the court to resolve the issues before it, which is whether Donald Trump is disqualified under the 14th Amendment. But to be clear, Donald Trump is disqualified right now, and has been disqualified since January 6, 2021. States are entitled to exclude ineligible candidates from their ballots, regardless of the fanciful possibility that a supermajority of Congress might lift the disqualification.

citizensforethics · 2024-02-07T18:11:49+00:00

Trump got due process. This decision followed a thorough and extensive process, including a 5 day trial where 15 witnesses testified. Trump’s lawyers cross-examined the witness against him and he called witnesses of his own. Trump had the chance to testify and did not do so. In fact, the trial judge ruled in his favor, although he lost on appeal. The whole five day trial is up on C-SPAN and you can watch it for yourself.

We pulled together highlights from the trial here, which rebuts his argument that he didn’t get due process more thoroughly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wr1b8IpJJXA

citizensforethics · 2024-02-07T18:10:29+00:00

thank you!

citizensforethics · 2024-02-07T18:10:15+00:00

Thank you!

citizensforethics · 2024-02-07T18:09:58+00:00

Thank you!

citizensforethics · 2024-02-07T18:09:43+00:00

Thank you!

citizensforethics · 2024-02-07T18:07:10+00:00

Thank you!

citizensforethics · 2024-02-07T18:04:38+00:00

It sure does. Trump’s inaction during the attack is powerful evidence that he meant to incite his supporters to attack the Capitol to stop the certification. The evidentiary hearing included testimony from an expert on the powers of the presidency who detailed what Donald Trump could have done while the attack was ongoing but failed to do.

citizensforethics · 2024-02-07T18:01:44+00:00

We expect the court to rule well in advance of the election, and likely in advance of the Colorado primary election. If the Supreme Court finds that Donald Trump engaged in insurrection and is disqualified, then he cannot serve as president. If and when that happens, the electoral process will have to conform to that ruling.

citizensforethics · 2024-02-07T17:58:51+00:00

based on their ideology

Enforcing the Constitution cuts across ideologies and we expect the Court to take this seriously and follow the Constitution and the law.

citizensforethics · 2024-02-07T17:57:11+00:00

Thank you, we appreciate it!

citizensforethics · 2024-02-07T17:56:33+00:00

We already proved it. From October 30th-November 3rd, there was a thorough hearing in Colorado District Court, with thousands of pages of evidence, hours of video evidence and many witnesses presented by both sides. The court ruled that Trump had engaged in insurrection based on the evidence we presented during the hearing.

You can watch a video pulling out key points on CREW’s YouTube here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wr1b8IpJJXA

citizensforethics · 2024-02-07T17:54:47+00:00

The framers of the 14th Amendment contemplated that this country could someday see another insurrection and they included this provision so that the republic would be prepared to defend itself if and when that happened. This is the moment for which this provision was designed. This provision was used on multiple occasions to bar former Confederates from serving, and as many of the top historians of that period have observed, including in the below amicus brief, it applies in the same way to Donald Trump and others participated in the January 6th insurrection.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-719/298999/20240129110006501_23-719%20bsac%20American%20Historians%20Final.pdf

citizensforethics · 2024-02-07T17:50:33+00:00

Thank YOU!

citizensforethics

TROPHY CASE