A Judge Rules Challenge to Ban Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene from Re-election Can Move Forward

AP Photo/John Bazemore, Pool

By Alex Jimenez and Cheyenne Galloway

ATLANTA, GA – A federal judge here this week paved the way for a group of Georgia voters to disqualify Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene for re-election to Congress—and after court Friday, a state court judge is expected to rule on MTG’s status.

The filing from voters argues she should be barred from the ballot because of “her role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the (U.S.) Capitol,” according to Neil Vigdor of the New York Times. Voters also accused Taylor Greene of declaring the “insurrection as a 1776 moment,” implying her support for overthrowing the United States government.

Friday, MTG testified in state court. According to news reports, Greene’s testimony did not establish that she planned for violence or coordinated with anyone who rioted on Jan. 6.

CNN filed a report opining that the “hole in the challengers’ case could significantly undermine their chances of disqualifying Greene, because they need to prove that she engaged in insurrection.”

Greene said she didn’t remember if she had ever spoken with any GOP lawmakers or White House officials about the potential for violence on Jan. 6. She also said she didn’t recall if she herself had posted tweets that appeared on her account, where she claimed the 2020 election was illegitimate.

She said that she never intended to promote any violence and that she didn’t recall any conversations with lawmakers or White House officials about the possibility for the pro-Trump protests to turn violent.

“I only believe in peaceful demonstration,” Greene said. “I do not support violence,” adding she believes President Joe Biden lost the election to Trump. She noted on the stand, “We saw a tremendous amount of voter fraud,” repeating a debunked claim that has become a rallying cry among Trump supporters.

Critics point to her coordinating with rioters and supporting the now convicted rioters in rejecting the peaceful transition of power.

“If you think about what our Declaration of Independence said it says to overthrow tyrants,” stated Taylor Greene. However, she denies taking any part in the Capitol riots.

The legal efforts to disqualify her stem from a constitutional provision that took effect after the civil war, banning members of the confederacy from holding office.

They specifically point to the third section of the 14th Amendment banning those who engage in rebellion or insurrection from holding civil office after previously taking oath as a member of congress.

“It mirrors several other cases involving Republican members of congress, whose roles leading up to and during the deadly riot have drawn intense criticism,” said the voters trying to oust MTG from the ballot.

The congresswoman had tried to negate the process, but Judge Amy Totenberg denied her request for a preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order.

“This case involves a whirlpool of colliding constitutional interests of public import,” Judge Totenberg wrote and further stated that Greene had failed to meet the “burden of persuasion.”

Greene’s lawyer James Bopp, Jr., criticized the ruling as flawed and felt it ignored the adverse effect of Greene’s right to run for office.

“This is fundamentally antidemocratic,” Bopp said, maintaining that Rep. Greene had “publicly and vigorously condemned the attack on the Capitol.”

Bopp called the efforts to remove Greene “a well-funded national effort to strip voters of their right to vote for candidates of their choice, with elections determined by “bureaucrats, judges, lawyers and clever legal arguments.”

According to Greene’s motion, the case couldn’t be resolved leading up to Georgia’s primary election on May 24. Judge Totenberg decided that Greene had failed to prove the “strong likelihood that she would prevail on the merits of her legal claims.”

Ron Fein, who is the legal director for Free Speech for People, the group pursuing the case, praised the judge’s decision.

“Judge Totenberg’s well-reasoned opinion explains why the Georgia voters who filed this challenge against Greene have the right to have their challenge heard, and why none of Greene’s objections to the Georgia state challenge have any merit,” Fein said.

About The Author

Alex Jimenez is a 4th year politcal science major at the University of Calfornia, Berkeley. He has future aspirations to attend law school and is from Pleasanton, Ca.

Related posts


  1. Keith Olson

    Judge Totenberg’s well-reasoned opinion

    Judge Amy Totenberg, a 2010 Obama appointee and the sister of extreme leftist NPR’s Nina Totengerg.

    I thought the Vanguard readers should have some context as to where the Judge’s “well reasoned opinion” may be coming from.

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
Sign up for