[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

How would using the words "insurrection" and "rebellion" as they were defined at the time the amendment was written produce unacceptable results? If the results are unacceptable, then the words shouldn't be used in charging the defendant since they would not fit the constitutional language necessary to make the charge. If you want to make a case within the bounds of constitutional law, then you have to use the language of the Constitution. Otherwise, you will subvert the Constitution, and create your own version of law, thereby rewriting the Constitution without proper amendment.

To put it simply, if the words used to make your charge don't comport with the definition of those words in the Constitution, then your charge is unconstitutional.

I don’t find it unacceptable and think it fits the definition of insurrection at that time.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device