Judge Rules Greene Can Run For Reelection Despite String of Controversies Within GOP

A United States judge has ruled that Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene can run for reelection, denying a bid that aims to block the congresswoman from a repeat of her post amid a string of controversies within the GOP.

The situation comes after the Republican is believed to have been involved in insurrection due to her rhetoric before the Capitol Hill riot last year. The lawmaker was tried under a Civil War-era law that bars officials from holding office if they violate their oath to protect the country.

Marjorie Taylor Greene

The Georgia Republican reacted to the news on Friday with a one-worded Twitter post that said, "ACQUITTED." Many GOP lawmakers have faced questions over their alleged involvement in the Jan. 6 Capitol Hill riot as Congress was meeting to formalize Joe Biden's presidential win over Donald Trump.

On the other hand, Democrats claim that 47-year-old Greene played a key role in calling for an "insurrection" in Washington. The case against the Republican centered around a provision of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the "Insurrectionist Disqualification Clause," as per BBC.

State Administrative Law Judge Charles Beaudrot submitted his findings of the case to Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger. The latter accepted them and said that Greene's name will remain on the ballot, making her eligible for reelection.

In a statement, Raffensperger said that Judge Beaudrot had issued his Initial Decision on May 6 that there was not enough evidence to prove the insurrection allegations against the Georgia lawmaker. The case was brought forward by a group of Georgia voters who wanted to have Greene disqualified.

According to the Washington Post, Greene is accused of frequently and repeatedly using language that helped incite violence at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. These include efforts to challenge the results of the 2020 election as "our 1776 moment."

Capitol Hill Insurrection

In April Greene testified about her alleged role in the attack where she said that she could not remember whether or not she urged then-President Trump to impose martial law to remain in power. A national election and campaign finance reform group, Free Speech for People, filed the challenge against the Georgia official in March with the region's secretary of state's office.

Judge Beaudrot said that Greene's public statements and heated rhetoric may well have contributed to the chaotic environment that led to the insurrection. However, he noted that the expression of constitutionally-protected political views, no matter how aberrant they may be, was not considered to be engaging in insurrection under the 14th Amendment.

The results of the case are seen as another setback in the liberal-backed efforts to hold Republican officials accountable for the Capitol Hill riot. Furthermore, it raises questions about whether or not similar constitutional challenges will even stand a chance against former President Trump.

In a statement, Free Speech for People said that the judge's decision betrayed the fundamental purpose of the 14th Amendment's Insurrectionist Disqualification Clause. They argued that it gives lawmakers a free pass to political violence as a tool for disrupting and overturning free and fair elections in the United States, CNN reported.