Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
As commonly predicted, financial institutions are joining social media and server hosts in attempts to punish or exclude Trump supporters. From One America News Network:
Some of the world’s biggest companies said on Sunday they will suspend donations to U.S lawmakers who voted against certifying the election for Joe Biden.
This includes JPMorgan Chase and Citigroup, which are two of the biggest U.S. banks. It also includes Marriott, which is the world’s largest hotel company. Additionally, this includes Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, which is a federation of 36 independent companies that provide health care insurance. [….]
Other major U.S. companies like Ford and Walmart haven’t paused donations yet, but a Walmart spokesman said they will factor in last week’s events to their review process.
They claim this is about rule of law. So let’s review the law.
Article II of the US Constitution assigns state legislatures (and only the legislatures, not the states generally) the exclusive authority to determine election procedures.
Democrats brought hundreds of lawsuits around the country to force changes to those procedures through the courts, which do not have that authority. Nor do governors.
Citing the pandemic, many appealed to emergency powers. An “emergency” is not merely a dire threat but an imminent one that allows no time for deliberation and debate. States have certainly been capable of resuming the normal legislative process since the summer. There is no emergency. There is no basis for emergency powers that suspend the normal constitutional process of law.
Election procedures were changed without legislative approval in the swing states of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. Those actions violated the US Constitution, not only state constitutions. It was not a local matter for local courts. But the US Supreme Court refused to hear challenges.
The Framers of the US Constitution did not intend for any branch of government to be sovereign over the others. Because the Judiciary shrugged its responsibility to enforce the Constitution, the Legislative branch had cause to explore its own options to respond to those clear violations of Article II.
That is all Ted Cruz and others recommended: a brief delay to explore options and debate. For that, various corporations are now attempting to ostracize and cripple elected representatives.
Those representatives have much more wealth, power, and fame with which to defend than you do. If they can be destroyed, so can you be destroyed.
Tolerance and debate are the way of a free people. If you grant the power to silence your opponents, you grant the power to silence you as well.Published in