Natelson calls January 6 a case of “limited forced resistance”

Former University of Montana law professor and current Independence Institute Constitutional Fellow Rob Natelson appeared on KGVO Talk Back on Monday and was asked about Jan. 6and riot at the United States Capitol.

Instead of referring to the incident as “an insurrection,” Natelson had a different term for the violence that occurred that day.

“Instead of being viewed as an insurgency, it should be viewed as something that has a long American history,” Natelson said. “It’s called ‘limited forced resistance’, meaning it was resistance that, unlike the left-wing riots that ransacked businesses and so on, was aimed directly at a specific target. . And although it causes property damage, it generally causes relatively few casualties, and the people who participate in it see themselves as defenders of the Constitution.

Natelson has just completed a seven-part series for The Epoch Times, titled “How the Supreme Court Rewrote the Constitution.” He explained the purpose of the articles.

“This is a period from 1937 to 1944, when the Supreme Court systematically disabled many constitutional restrictions on the federal government, stopped imposing restrictions on what federal authorities could spend, stopped enforce restrictions on what they could regulate, stopped enforcing restrictions on what land they could own, and also in many ways stopped protecting civil liberties.

Natelson was also asked to constitutionally define a US citizen.

“The 14th Amendment provides guidance on who is a citizen,” he said. “Just let me read it to you. It says that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction are citizens of the United States and of the State in which they reside”. So you were born and naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction, then you are a citizen of the United States and a citizen of your state.

Asked about President Biden’s promise to appoint a black woman to the United States Supreme Court, Natelson said that with the retirement of Justice Stephen Breyer, the president now has the option of appointing his replacement, however, Natelson commented on a little-known fact about the United States Supreme Court. To research.

“The Constitution does not require a Supreme Court justice to be a lawyer,” he said. “99% of the American public, in fact, over 99% are not lawyers. Maybe it’s time we got a knowledgeable non-lawyer on the ground. It also seems to promote diversity. But again, my preference would be that we only consider philosophy and forensic qualifications.

Click here to listen to the full Talk Back program with Rob Natelson.

KEEP READING: Scroll to see what the headlines were the year you were born

50 famous brands that no longer exist

KEEP READING: See the Richest Person in Every State

Comments are closed.