Mr. Bopp, in an interview, declared the matter “probably the most frivolous case I’ve ever seen,” however allowed that what he known as an “unethical” exploitation of North Carolina legislation by “competent” attorneys might pose an actual risk to Mr. Cawthorn — and by extension, to others labeled “insurrectionists” by liberal attorneys.
“That is the true risk to our democracy,” he mentioned. “Simply by bringing the criticism, they may jeopardize a member of Congress operating for re-election.”
“They’ve a number of targets,” he added. “It simply so occurs that Madison Cawthorn is the tip of the spear.”
That’s as a result of North Carolina’s election statute provides challengers a remarkably low bar to query a candidate’s constitutional {qualifications} for workplace. As soon as somebody establishes a “affordable suspicion or perception” {that a} candidate just isn’t certified, the burden shifts to the officeseeker to show in any other case.
If Mr. Cawthorn is labeled an “insurrectionist,” that might have broader ramifications. Different Republican Home members, reminiscent of Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, Mo Brooks of Alabama, Paul Gosar of Arizona, and Lauren Boebert of Colorado, face comparable accusations, however their state’s election legal guidelines current larger hurdles for challenges to their candidate {qualifications}. If one among their colleagues is disqualified for his function in encouraging the rioters, these hurdles would possibly change into simpler to clear.
The attorneys difficult Mr. Cawthorn’s eligibility are utilizing an modification final invoked in 1920, when Consultant Victor L. Berger, an Austrian-American socialist, was denied his seat representing Wisconsin after criticizing American involvement in World Warfare I.
If nothing else, the attorneys, together with two former justices of the North Carolina Supreme Court docket, need to depose Mr. Cawthorn as a part of discovery to query his actions earlier than, throughout and after the assault on the Capitol.
