Natelson Calls January 6 a case of ‘Limited Forcible Resistance’
Former University of Montana law professor and current Constitutional Fellow at the Independence Institute Rob Natelson was on the KGVO Talk Back show on Monday and was asked about the January 6th riot at the U.S. Capitol.
Instead of referring to the incident as ‘an insurrection’, Natelson had a different term for the violence that occurred that day.
“Instead of it being viewed as an insurrection, it should be viewed as something that has a long American history,” said Natelson. “It’s what is called ‘limited forcible resistance’, meaning it was resistance, which was unlike the leftist riots that trashed businesses and so forth, is targeted directly at a specific target. And while it causes property damage, it generally has relatively few casualties, and the people participate in it think of themselves as defending the Constitution.”
Natelson just completed a seven part series of articles for the Epoch Times, called ‘How the Supreme Court Rewrote the Constitution’. He explained the purpose of the articles.
“What it is about is a period of time from 1937 to 1944 when the Supreme Court systematically disabled many Constitutional restraints on the federal government, stopped enforcing restraints on what the Feds could spend, stopped enforcing restraints on what they could regulate, stopped enforcing restraints on the land they could own, and also stopped in many respects protecting civil liberties.”
Natelson was also asked to constitutionally define an American citizen.
“The 14th amendment does provide some guidance on who a citizen is,” he said. “Let me just read it to you. It says ‘all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside’. So, you're born and naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction, then you are a citizen of United States and a citizen of your state.”
Asked about President Biden’s promise to nominate a Black woman to the U.S. Supreme Court, Natelson said with the retirement of Justice Stephen Breyer, the President now has the opportunity to nominate his replacement, however, Natelson commented about a little known fact regarding the U.S. Supreme Court.
“The Constitution does not require a Supreme Court justice to be a lawyer,” he said. “99 percent of the American public, in fact, over 99 percent are non lawyers. Maybe it's time we had a knowledgeable non lawyer on the court. That would seem to promote diversity as well. But again, my preference would be that we consider judicial philosophy and qualifications alone.”
Click here to listen to the entire Talk Back Program with Rob Natelson.
KEEP READING: Scroll to see what the big headlines were the year you were born
50 Famous Brands That No Longer Exist
KEEP READING: See the richest person in every state