Follow BeltwayBlips on Twitter
The Powell Precedent
Lawyers, Guns and Money —
... is the fact that the Senate is probably unable to prevent him from being seated as a matter of constitutional law. The Supreme Court ruled 8-1 (and 8-0 among justices deciding on the merits) in Powell v. McCormack that "in judging the qualifications of its members, Congress is limited to the standing qualifications prescribed in the Constitution." It is possible to distinguish the cases -- the fact that Burris is appointed obviously mitigates the problems with Congress interfering with the integrity of elections that Douglas discusses in his concurrence. ...
Legal Roundabout
Hotline On Call Part Deux —
... To counter Reid's threat, legal scholars are pointing to a precedent set in the Supreme Court case Powell v. McCormack (1969). In that ruling, Rep. Adam Clayton Powell (D-NY) -- plagued by scandal, but reelected in 1966 -- was allowed to keep his seat, which had been declared vacant by House Speaker John McCormack. In an 8-1 decision, the court declared that Congress can only bar a member if he or she fails to fulfill Art. I, Sec. 3 of the Constitution, which states, "No person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of ...
No Welcome Mat For Burris
Swampland —
... of a special election to fill Barack Obama's Senate seat. As it stands, Blagojevich is still the Governor of Illinois, and Burris meets the constitutional requirements for being a Senator: He is over 30 years old, has been a citizen for at least nine years and is a resident of the state that he would represent. The most relevant legal precedent would suggest that Congress does not have the power to add any other requirements. ...
What, Oh What Is To Be Done About Burris?
Firedoglake —
... of a special election to fill Barack Obama's Senate seat. As it stands, Blagojevich is still the Governor of Illinois, and Burris meets the constitutional requirements for being a Senator: He is over 30 years old, has been a citizen for at least nine years and is a resident of the state that he would represent. The most relevant legal precedent would suggest that Congress does not have the power to add any other requirements. ...
