Chris

But true. Our armchair legal definitions are besides the point. The SCoTUS is looking at this precisely because there is a case to examine, and urgently. The terms used in the constitution are ordinarily understood in the context in which they were drafted - as the article i provided goes to some length to point out - which means that 21st century, social media friendly definitions of ‘insurrection’ are irrelevant. What the constitution’s drafters meant, however, is for the SCoTUS to determine - and whether January 6 triggers that clause.

There are interesting times ahead, and for us distant observers the most rewarding approach (even if you tend to one side or the other) is not to pretend you have something definitely worked out, when you really, really haven’t.