happened was in new mexico. a judge ousted a county commissioner from his office, threw him out of office, and barred him from ever serving in elected office again. specifically because he participated in the january 6th attack on the capitol. the judge ruled that this commissioner had to be thrown out of office and was disqualified from serving again because of section 3 of the amendment. that section of the constitution says bars from office any state or federal officeholder who has taken an oath to for the constitution but who has engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. that ruling in new mexico was the first time since 1869 court disqualified an american public official under that clause in the u.s. constitution. it was also the first time that the january 6th attack was formally found by a court to be an insurrection against the
that section of the constitution says bars from office any state or federal officeholder who has taken an oath to for the constitution but who has engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. that ruling in new mexico was the first time since 1869 court disqualified an american public official under that clause in the u.s. constitution. it was also the first time that the january 6th attack was formally found by a court to be an insurrection against the united states. although that sounds like kind of a technical determination, a finding like that has lots of consequences. and now this has happened again. not in new mexico, but alaska. a judge in alaska has just ruled that a sitting state representative, a republican member of the state legislature in alaska, is likely ineligible to hold public office, including the office he is in now, because he is a member of the far-right pro-trump paramilitary group the
this is him on saturday. >> it was corruption and election interference on a scale that we have never seen before in our country. the 2020 election was rigged and stolen, and now our country is being destroyed by people who got into office through cheating and through fraud. >> for another chance in two years, suggesting repeatedly now that the 2020 election should be rerun or demanding to be declared the winner, as if that is a thing, which it's not. now, the former president may not be held in responsible in any way for january 6th, but today a federal judge in new mexico decided to hold one elected official there accountable, removing this guy, a january 6th rioter and a founder of the group cowboys for trump, from his elected position as county commissioner. now, he did so under the 14th amendment's provision barring insurrectionists from public office. it's believed to be the first time this has happened since 1869, which is remarkable enough, but in order to do what
insurrectionists from republican office. it's believed to be the first time it's happened since 1869, which is remarkable enough. but in order to do it, i noted to do a dead, the judge had to rule that the january 6th attack was in fact an insurrection. that too is a first. in a moment, we'll be joined by michigan secretary of state, but first, one the surveillance video from the attempt to overturn the 2020 election in georgia and what it hurt. cnn's juju efren uncovered -- the story behind it, he joins us now. what can you tell us? >> anderson, you covered some of it, the surveillance video shows this election's office in georgia, just one of the states where the speech is about when machines are under investigation, kathy latham. she's the woman there in blue. she used to be chairwoman of the coffee county gop. already under investigation, this woman is, for posing as a fake elector, signing a fake document that declared donald trump the winner of the 2020 election. she's seen escorted
do. the truth, is i just in the number of justices on the bench, it is not as polarizing and radical as some cautious dems would have you believe. as the court's own website acknowledges, the number changed six times before settling it nine in 1869. and even since that date, the number of justices on the bench hasn't always been consistent. need i remind you of 2016, when republicans launched an 11 month blockade a mayor garland's nomination to the supreme court, in the wake of antonin scalia. they kept the supreme court and just eight justices for almost a year. and they are stating the stage to do something similar again. mitch mcconnell has said he won't commit to any hearings for a biden scotus pick, if his party retake the senate and he becomes majority leader in 2023. radical is not changing the size of the court, something that has been done many times before, including by the republican six years ago. radical is what this current court has been doing over the
it is not as polarizing and radical as some cautious dems would have you believe. as the court's own website acknowledges, the number changed six times before settling it nine in 1869. and even since that date, the number of justices on the bench hasn't always been consistent. need i remind you of 2016, when republicans launched an 11 month blockade a mayor garland 's nomination to the supreme court, in the wake of antonin scalia. they kept the supreme court at just eight justices for almost a year. and they are stating the stage to do something similar again. mitch mcconnell has said he won't commit to any hearings for a biden scotus pick, if his party retake the senate and he becomes majority leader in 2023. radical is not changing the size of the court, something that has been done many times before, including by the republican six years ago. radical is what this current court has been doing over the course of its most recent term. the far-right roberts court has rolled back abortion rights, dealt a deadly blow to the separation of church and state, strict these states ability to determine their own gun control policies. curb the federal government's ability to tackle climate
nine supreme court justices have done well in 1869, but i "new york times" op ed has this case in this headline. how to look at a supreme court. and as a push to impeach supreme court justices. democratic congresswoman is on board. >> if we allow supreme court nominees to lie under oath and secure lifetime appointments to the highest court of the land and then issue, issue without basis there must be consequences for such a deeply destabilizing action and hostile takeover of our democratic institutions. >> sandra: must be consequences for lying supreme court justices when there is absolutely no proof that that was the case. >> no, go back and check the
line, forced to let fields go fal low as alcaselocations are the need to cut up to 4 million acre feet in 2023, more than 1.3 trillion gallons or almost as much as california is allotted in a year. john wesley powell, who ran this river in 1869, he stated it to the federal government. there's not enough water to support the way we have developed. >> the first guy down the colorado tried to warn us this would happen right now. >> absolutely and now it is. there's this assumption it's always going to be there. i don't think people will change until it changes. >> reporter: but as long as there's fun to be had and water to drink it's easy to ignore the villain's warning. do not become addicted to water. it will take hold of you and you will resent its absence.
all part of this system. how do you think people understand that these days? >> that's great. i don't think we do. i come from connecticut. i grew up on the east coast where water law is totally different. here it's first in line, first in right, it's treated like a mineral. >> reporter: some farmers in arizona are some of the last in line, forced to let fields go fallow as allocations are cut. and the bureau of reclamation warned members of the senate the need to cut 4 million acres, almost as much as california is allotted in a year. john wesley powell who ran this river in 1869, he stated it to the federal government. there's not enough water to support the way we have developed. the first guy down the colorado tried to warn us that this would happen right now.
year. >> john wesley powell, who ran this river in 1869, he stated it to the federal government, there's not enough water to support the way we have developed. >> the first guy down the colorado tried to warn us this would happen right now. >> and now it is. >> there's this assumption it's always going to be there. and i don't think people will change until it changes. >> until it's not there. >> reporter: but as long as there's fun to be had and water to drink, it's easy to ignore the villain's warning in "mad max fury road." do not become addicted to water. it will take hold of you and you will resent its absence. bill weir, cnn, vernal, utah. >> bill, thank you. let's take a look now at this stunning video from alongside the yellowstone river as that two-story house just washed away there. the montana couple that lost their home had been used to high