Idea

[Хahar 🤔]

In 1800, let's say that the Federalists blocked the election in the House of a President indefinitely, and elected a Federalist as President pro tempore of the Senate and thus President of the United States. The Virginia and Pennsylvania militia then marched on Washington and deposed the Federalist regime, installing Thomas Jefferson as President. Jefferson holds that all Federalist Congressmen were party to an illegal rebellion, ending Federalist opposition to the regime forcibly. As the new regime is dependent on force, Jefferson imposes martial law throughout the nation and suspends the Bill of Rights and Constitution, resulting in what turns out to be a military dictatorship.

[Dan the Roman]

In 1800, let's say that the Federalists blocked the election in the House of a President indefinitely, and elected a Federalist as President pro tempore of the Senate and thus President of the United States. The Virginia and Pennsylvania militia then marched on Washington and deposed the Federalist regime, installing Thomas Jefferson as President. Jefferson holds that all Federalist Congressmen were party to an illegal rebellion, ending Federalist opposition to the regime forcibly. As the new regime is dependent on force, Jefferson imposes martial law throughout the nation and suspends the Bill of Rights and Constitution, resulting in what turns out to be a military dictatorship.

For it to get to Civil War it would have required the collusion of John Adams and Alexander Hamilton, which is one of the reasons such a plot never took off. Both disliked Jefferson, but neither wanted a Civil War, nor particularly did Adams like the type of Federalist that the House likely would have chosen.

[Хahar 🤔]

In 1800, let's say that the Federalists blocked the election in the House of a President indefinitely, and elected a Federalist as President pro tempore of the Senate and thus President of the United States. The Virginia and Pennsylvania militia then marched on Washington and deposed the Federalist regime, installing Thomas Jefferson as President. Jefferson holds that all Federalist Congressmen were party to an illegal rebellion, ending Federalist opposition to the regime forcibly. As the new regime is dependent on force, Jefferson imposes martial law throughout the nation and suspends the Bill of Rights and Constitution, resulting in what turns out to be a military dictatorship.

For it to get to Civil War it would have required the collusion of John Adams and Alexander Hamilton, which is one of the reasons such a plot never took off. Both disliked Jefferson, but neither wanted a Civil War, nor particularly did Adams like the type of Federalist that the House likely would have chosen.

Obviously it involves a certain level of implausibility, but the revolution involved almost no real bloodshed.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Won't work. Under the Presidential Succession Act of 1792, the President pro tem of the Senate acts as a temporary Acting President until new elections are held for President and Vice President are held, so even under this supposed Federalist shenanigan, there would be a new election for President in a year's time.

Moreover, When Adam's term ends, so does that of the 6th Congress. The House of the 7th Congress had a majority of DR delegations and would quickly elect Jefferson President.  Granted, the Senate of the 7th Congress started with a nominal 17-15 Federalist majority, but they would need to be united in their stupidity to try such an affront to hold onto the Presidency for but a single year.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Jefferson was a democrat and a writer of the Constitution. He would never hurt civil liberties.

[Хahar 🤔]

Jefferson was a democrat and a writer of the Constitution. He would never hurt civil liberties.

He wasn't a huge fan of judicial independence.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Jefferson was a democrat and a writer of the Constitution. He would never hurt civil liberties.

He wasn't a huge fan of judicial independence.

He would never do a similar thing. No way.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Jefferson was a democrat and a writer of the Constitution. He would never hurt civil liberties.

He wasn't a huge fan of judicial independence.

He would never do a similar thing. No way.

Agree. Hamilton was the one with authoritarian leanings

[Хahar 🤔]

Jefferson was a democrat and a writer of the Constitution. He would never hurt civil liberties.

He wasn't a huge fan of judicial independence.

He would never do a similar thing. No way.

Why not? He tried to use the courts to get his way, as seen in the trial of Aaron Burr.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Jefferson was a democrat and a writer of the Constitution. He would never hurt civil liberties.

He wasn't a huge fan of judicial independence.

He would never do a similar thing. No way.

Why not? He tried to use the courts to get his way, as seen in the trial of Aaron Burr.

And what is illegal in that ?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

More germanely, Jefferson and other Republicans made considerable use of State courts to squelch Federalist newspapers and the like that attacked him.  He really was the pot calling the kettle black in this area, since save for the name of the charge, there was no real difference between sedition and criminal libel.