The United States Supreme Court has denied a Writ of Certiorari in docket 22-380 BRUNSON, RALAND J. V. ADAMS, ALMA S., ET AL. in the order list posted 9 January 2023 (page 5). In the certiorari writ, Brunson asked SCOTUS to remove the said defendants from office without delay and order the lower court to grant his complaint without delay.
In Brunson’s complaint he not only sought the removal of the defendants from office and the reinstatement of Donald Trump as President but he apparently was also seeking almost three billion dollars in damages. Page 2 bottom of page, “He advanced constitutional, tort, promissory estoppel claims and sought almost three billion dollars in damages“.
A correction is in order
As a matter of integrity, in the original posting of this story, it was stated, “No court has the power to remove any person in office, and no civilian remedy exists to remove a Federal Official from their office either.”
It appears that statement was not entirely correct, in the complaint middle of page 22 and beginning page 23:
“Courts do have the authority to remove a sitting congressman as shown in 18 U.S.C, Code § 2381 which states, ‘Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.’ A court adjudicating that a congressman is incapable of holding his office is a removal of his office.”
However, while this one exception is stipulated, Mr. Brunson’s strategy is a losing strategy as he seeks a remedy in a civil court and not a criminal court. Treason, fraud, etc. are all criminal matters and only a criminal court is competent enough to adjudicate a guilty or not guilty verdict in criminal matters.
For argument sake
Let us assume for a moment that Brunson got at least part of what he wanted and all the named defendants were removed from office by the court. Does he truly expect that the nation is just going to accept it? The Democrats certainly won’t take it lying down. Most of all no matter what Donald Trump would not be reinstated as President of the United States, that bell is not going to be unrung. The constitution has a clear line of succession. Upon the inability to discharge the office of President and the inability of the Vice-President to assume office, the job goes to the Speaker of the House of Representatives.
What of all the laws and spending measures that were signed into law since Biden has taken office?
Do they retroactively become invalid?
Do we make everyone pay back all that money to the Treasury, including all the stimulus checks?
Do America’s heroes have to pay back their paychecks all because Biden was ineligible to be president?
Has anyone in favor of this even considered the far-reaching consequences of this action?
Do they even care?
Opinion
Republicans, if they are the fair-minded and rational people some claim to be would realize that the above scenario is an untenable situation and remove the disability under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
Democrats, if they are the fair-minded and ration people some claim to be would realize the same thing and work with the Republicans to find a more amicable solution.
The political climate of this country is such that it is a powder keg waiting for a spark to happen. If something is not done to calm it down, there is going to be an explosion.