Aug 27, 2024
Republicans Use Infamous Dred Scott Ruling In Sad Attempt To Disqualify Harris
Republicans Use Infamous Dred Scott Ruling In Sad Attempt To Disqualify Harris
- 5 minutes
GOP group says Harris cannot
be president due to slavery.
What are they up to?
This Republican group suggests
Kamala can't be president because of a 170
year old Supreme Court decision.
[00:00:15]
Likens her to a slave.
Horrible reminder of the impact of
the Dred Scott decisions that Scott versus
Sanford declared that slaves weren't U.S.
Citizens and thus not protected
by the federal government.
[00:00:30]
National Federation
of Republican Assemblies Nfra has cited
the infamous 1857 Dred Scott Supreme
Court decision, which stated
that enslaved people weren't citizens.
To argue that Vice President Kamala Harris
is ineligible to run for president
[00:00:47]
according to the Constitution independent.
With this reporting,
Republican group's platform and policy
document noted that the constitutional
qualifications of presidential eligibility
states that no person except
a natural born citizen shall be eligible,
[00:01:04]
or a citizen of the United States
at the time of adoption
of this Constitution, shall be eligible
to the office of president.
And the document didn't stop
at Kamala Harris.
The phrase platform document
argued that several states candidates,
major political parties have ignored this
fundamental presidential qualification,
[00:01:23]
including candidates Nikki Haley,
Vivek Vivek Ramaswamy, Kamala Harris,
whose parents were not American citizens
at the time of their birth.
Now, this sounds crazy
to a lot of people out there.
It does.
[00:01:38]
Well, here's the document as proof,
citing Dred Scott versus Sanford,
and it's redlined for you.
They're pointing out certain things
precedent setting U.S.
Supreme Court cases below.
[00:01:55]
And there you have the reference,
including calling out Kamala Harris.
Now, the Constitution states that only
natural born citizens can be president.
Harris was born and raised
in Oakland, California.
Under their own reasoning,
George Washington, Thomas Jefferson
and other founding fathers
wouldn't be eligible since they were born
[00:02:14]
of parents from British colonies.
Candace McDuffie, our friend
with the root there, pointing it out.
With millions watching and many people
benefiting from this program called
indisputable, we just need 1% of
the viewers to become a paid member so we
[00:02:31]
can continue to bring this content to you.
- Now back to the show.
- They have no limits.
Dina.
Okay, on the one hand, they're telling us
that slavery was a good thing.
Slavery developed black people,
uncivilized and enslaved people
and allowed them to earn learn a trade.
[00:02:50]
It made life better. It wasn't so bad.
There's books here in Georgia
that reference for school children,
that singing and fellowship made the long,
hot workdays seem short propaganda.
What do you make of this tired, nasty,
[00:03:09]
other type of, filing?
I mean, it's definitely racism.
In case anybody forgot, she's biracial.
This is basically their way of saying that
just like Jesse Waters reminder that she's
a woman in case people forget that.
[00:03:26]
But in terms of the law, because I've
actually been asked this question,
people are worried like, is this actually
something we should worry about?
There are things to worry about
in this election that the Republicans
are bringing, especially out in Georgia
with the election board.
This is not one of them.
The Dred Scott decision
was overturned long ago.
[00:03:44]
Natural born citizen means
are if you are born in this country.
But the reason why this is coming up
is there is an effort in the Republican
Party to change that and to say,
if you are a child of an immigrant,
[00:04:00]
then you are not a natural born citizen.
And not just for the right
to be able to become president,
but for other rights in our country.
It's their way of what they think
is trying to keep the country more white.
And the fact is, is that, it would
[00:04:18]
require basically the Supreme Court
to change the interpretation of it.
So this is where elections matter,
because the next president could nominate
one or more Supreme Court justices.
And we have some really extreme justices
on that court, Alito, Thomas Gorsuch,
[00:04:38]
who knows what they would do.
I mean, we wouldn't have thought
that they would overturn Roe,
a very settled law regarding abortion.
So today, for this election,
that issue is only on the table
in terms of the Supreme Court.
[00:04:55]
But this issue is not going to go away.
There is an effort
and the Republican Party to.
Change how we give rights to citizenship
to make it more difficult for people.
Who are immigrants? Children, essentially.
[00:05:14]
On the one hand, I appreciate your legal
analysis here because it sounds like we
we can put this just on the back burner a
little bit as we barrel towards November.
On the other hand, if the Nfra decides
to take Clarence Thomas out on a yacht.
[00:05:31]
Okay, Who knows?
And there are others who join him.
They could actually try to moon
moonwalk back, rights and citizenship.
And it is batty. It's batty.
[00:05:46]
This is keep destroying the country
that's already not perfect.
This is what these people
seem hell bent on doing.
- What are we going to be left with.
- Rhetorically, I ask?
Now Playing (Clips)
Episode
Podcast
Indisputable with Dr. Rashad Richey: August 27, 2024
Hosts: Sharon ReedDina Sayegh Doll
- 7 minutes
- 8 minutes
- 5 minutes
- 6 minutes
- 11 minutes
- 4 minutes