A group of Georgia voters is challenging Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s eligibility to run for re-election

The challenge filed with the Georgia secretary of state’s office says it’s being brought by a group of registered voters in Greene’s congressional district.

1. Talk about destroying democracy and killing people’s free speech & free elections!

These hard left political activists are trying to literally take away my district’s ability to re-elect me again to Congress by perverting our courts using their J6 conspiracy theory and lies. pic.twitter.com/u8xYYUUhLL

— Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (@RepMTG) April 11, 2022

A similar challenge was brought against US Rep. Madison Cawthorn in North Carolina and that effort was halted by a federal judge.

Just like the Cawthorn case, Greene filed her own federal suit to stop the proceedings against her under state law.

On Friday, Rep. Greene filed a lawsuit challenging a state law that a group of voters is using to challenge her eligibility to run for re-election.

Greene’s lawsuit asks a judge to declare that the law that the voters are using to challenge her eligibility is itself unconstitutional and to prohibit state officials from enforcing it.

Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment is central to the case. It states:

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress … shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

More from the AP reports,

Greene “vigorously denies that she ‘aided and engaged in insurrection to obstruct the peaceful transfer of presidential power,’” the lawsuit says. The law only requires the people challenging a candidate’s eligibility to file a written statement of why they believe the candidate is not qualified, and that automatically triggers the secretary of state’s request for a hearing before an administrative law judge, the lawsuit says. The fact that a government investigation can be triggered based only on the challenger’s belief violates Greene’s First Amendment right to run for political office, the lawsuit says.The challenge statute also puts the burden on Greene to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that she didn’t engage in the alleged behavior, and that “burden shifting” violates the due process clause of the 14th Amendment, the lawsuit says. The lawsuit also alleges that the challenge statute “directly usurps” Congress’ constitutional ability to judge whether a member is qualified. Finally, a law passed in 1872 removed the disqualifications put in place by the part of the 14th Amendment that the challengers are trying to use against Greene, the lawsuit says.

According to reports from the American Bar Association, the judge in Greene’s case is not convinced the judge in Cawthorn’s case got it right.

The judge in Green’s case is reported to have said she “thought that the amnesty law protected prior (meaning the confederacy insurrection), but not future insurrections.”

WLT commented further:

Was January 6 an insurrection?

If it was, then why aren’t we seeing criminal convictions for insurrection?  Instead, we’re only seeing plea deals for trespass.

January 6 is being used to silence free speech in the name of free speech.  The political opposition and media are using that day to silence and prosecute the voices of Americans.

Marina Medvin, one of the attorneys representing Americans that were at the protests on January 6, visited with Sebastian Gorka yesterday.  You should watch the interview for a sobering view of the cases that have been brought against conservatives.

Why I’m defending the Accused of January 6. @MarinaMedvin with Sebastian Gorka One on Onehttps://t.co/Cg0PcKmRV2

— Sebastian Gorka DrG (@SebGorka) April 15, 2022

Sources: WLT, AP, American Bar Association