On April 22, 2022, ECBAWM attorney Andrew G. Celli, Jr., supported in court by ECBAWM partner Sam Shapiro and ECBAWM paralegal Dymond Wells, questioned Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene under oath for approximately 5 hours about her role in the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

ECBAWM, together with the national advocacy organization Free Speech for People, represented four Georgia voters who challenged Rep. Greene’s qualifications to run for re-election to the House of Representatives. The challenge, which was filed with the Georgia Secretary of State, alleged that the 14^th Amendment bars Rep. Greene from seeking re-election because she engaged in insurrection as a member of Congress by urging, instructing, and supporting the people who attacked the U.S. Capitol on January 6.

An administrative law judge heard the voters’ challenge on April 22, 2022. During the hearing, Mr. Celli, Jr. questioned Rep. Greene about statements she made on social and traditional media calling for violence against politicians, disparaging the results of the 2020 election as fraudulent, rallying her supporters to act to overturn President Biden’s election, and invoking phrases associated with the January 6 insurrection, including “1776.” It was the first time a member of Congress had been questioned under oath about the events of January 6, 2021. The hearing was broadcast live on multiple media outlets, including C-SPAN and CNN, and widely covered in the international news media.

The voters are represented by ECBAWM attorneys Mr. Celli, Jr., Mr. Shapiro, and Andrew Jondahl, and ECBAWM paralegal Ms. Wells, along with co-counsel at Free Speech for People and Bryan Sells.

Judge Amy Totenberg of the U.S. District for the Northern District of Georgia has denied Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene’s application for a preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order that, if granted, would have halted disqualification challenge proceedings against Rep. Greene and allowed her to be included on the ballot for the May 24 primary elections. In its 73-page ruling, the Court cited Rep. Greene’s “failure to cite persuasive legal authority or even include a developed legal argument” in holding that she “failed[ed] to establish a substantial likelihood of success on the merits.”

The challenge to Rep. Greene’s re-election was filed by a group of Georgia voters in late March on 14th Amendment grounds – specifically, that Rep. Greene was disqualified under the Insurrectionist Disqualifications Clause of the 14th Amendment because she engaged in insurrection at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.

The instant lawsuit, Greene v. Raffensperger et al, was filed by Rep. Greene in an attempt to end the challenge to her candidacy without allowing it to proceed through Georgia’s established legal process.

The underlying disqualification challenge is scheduled to be heard by a state administrative law judge on April 22.

The group of Georgia voters are represented in Greene v. Raffensperger et al by ECBAWM attorneys Andrew G. Celli, Jr., Sam Shapiro, and Andrew Jondahl, along with co-counsel at Free Speech for People and Bryan Sells.

Related
“ECBAWM Represents Arizona Voters in Candidacy Challenges Under Fourteenth Amendment’s Insurrectionist Disqualification Clause”

Press
“Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene testifies for more than 3 hours in hearing on whether to disqualify her from seeking reelection,” CNN
“Effort to Remove Marjorie Taylor Greene from Ballot Can Proceed, Judge Says,” The New York Times
“Legal effort to remove Greene from Ga. ballot can proceed, judge rules,” The Washington Post