wrong again, Justice Samuel Alito qualified in one question that it was “allegedly” an insurrection. Trump himself faces 91 charges across four cases, two of which are related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. But insurrection is not among the charges, and he was acquitted by the Senate after the House impeached him on charges that included inciting an insurrection.It was an armed insurrection that included firearms. oath breaker.
An attorney for former President Donald Trump argued Thursday before the US Supreme Court that the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol was just "a riot" during a tense back-and-forth with one of the high court's liberal justices over what constitutes an "insurrection."
"Why would this not be an insurrection?" Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson asked the lawyer, Jonathan Mitchell, as the nine justices of the Supreme Court were hearing oral arguments in a landmark case over whether Trump — the GOP frontrunner — could remain on Colorado's primary ballot ahead of the 2024 election.
Mitchell responded, "For an insurrection, there needs to be an organized, concerted effort to overthrow the government of the United States through violence."
Brown replied, "And so the point is that a chaotic effort to overthrow the government is not an insurrection?"
Mitchell said, "We didn't concede that it's an effort to overthrow the government either." He chalked up the deadly events of January 6 to a "shameful" and "criminal" day.
"None of these criteria were met. This was a riot. It was not an insurrection," Mitchell said, adding: "The events were shameful, criminal, violent, all of those things, but did not qualify as an insurrection as that term is used in Section 3" of the 14th Amendment.
If he was wrong this would have been a fantastic chance for a flaming liberal Justice to follow up and dispute this, she didn't. Want to know why? Because it was a riot not an insurrection