Comments on: Judicial Watch Hopes to Sue to Enforce Article I, Section 6, Relative to Hillary Clinton Nomination

By: Michael W

Michael W — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 07:28:33 +0000

I think Rahm Emanuel falls under this category as well. I think Chris Cox should never have been confirmed under this theory as well.

I like this as a reform and believe the intent was not to allow persons in the Legislature to move to the Executive office during their term. I also believe it means the time period you would have had to serve even if that person did resign, the time period should still hold.

By: Glaivester

Glaivester — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 03:42:21 +0000

Would it be acceptable for Mrs Clinton to take the position at the lower salary? That way, she doesnâ€™t raise her own salary.

That would be controversial, but it has been done before. (I don’t have the history immeiately available, though). Nonetheless, some people would argue that due to the language of the Constitution, this is an unconstitutional solution. What would happen if Hillary’s nomination were challenged in court, I dont know,

By: Demo Rep

Demo Rep — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 02:26:59 +0000

The clause was to END office buying (by legislator votes) — a very major corrupt part of the pre-1776 British Parliament.

The Constitution continues to ROT away under the nonstop attacks by STATISTS who want UNLIMITED government.

By: Bob Richard

Bob Richard — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 02:24:00 +0000

There's a good discussion of this at Balkinizantion. The most recent post links to the previous one. Finding a plaintiff with standing may be a problem, at least if there's any analogy between this situation and the cases questioning whether candidate X is a "natural born citizen". Election law scholar Dan Tokaji has this analysis of that issue which covers the question of standing in detail.

By: Robert

Robert — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 20:16:02 +0000

Would it be acceptable for Mrs Clinton to take the position at the lower salary? That way, she doesn’t raise her own salary.

By: Frank Maddaloni

Frank Maddaloni — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 19:40:59 +0000

The constitution says an office to which HE was elected. Hillary is a She- case closed.

By: Fred Church Ortiz

Fred Church Ortiz — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 19:36:07 +0000

That sounds like it would render the entire clause unenforceable. I think “during the time for which he was elected” might be intended to prevent that kind of scenario.

By: Richard

Richard — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 19:16:18 +0000

A friend has pointed out to me that Senator Clinton could conceivably resign from the Senate before she is formally nominated to be Secretary of State.

By: D. Frank Robinson

D. Frank Robinson — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 19:10:14 +0000

Of course one cannot rely up the Congress to enforce its own laws or the Constitution by rejecting the confirmation of Mrs. Clinton. Another example that an unrepresentative (too small) House of Representatives is nothing but an appendage of the Executive Branch.

As noted elsewhere the size of the US House should be expanded by a factor of six to ten.