06-05-2009
|
#3 (permalink)
|
|
Suspended
|
Not Ranked
:
+0 / -0
0 score
Re: Constitutional Question: Term Limits
Quote:
Originally Posted by lemit
In 1955, the U.S. Supreme Court decided 5-4 in U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton that the states could not impose term limits.
|
Wow. Five to four is a close decision. Nice find on SCOTUS history, lemit.
U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Quote:
Writing for the majority, Justice John Paul Stevens concluded that:
“Finally, state-imposed restrictions, unlike the congressionally imposed restrictions at issue in Powell, violate a third idea central to this basic principle: that the right to choose representatives belongs not to the States, but to the people. ... Following the adoption of the 17th Amendment in 1913, this ideal was extended to elections for the Senate. The Congress of the United States, therefore, is not a confederation of nations in which separate sovereigns are represented by appointed delegates, but is instead a body composed of representatives of the people.” He further noted that sustaining Amendment 73 would result in "a patchwork of state qualifications" for U.S. Representatives, and described that consequence as inconsistent with "the uniformity and national character that the framers sought to insure." Concurring, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote that the amendment would "interfere" with the "relationship between the people of the Nation and their National Government."
Justice Clarence Thomas, in dissent, countered that the Constitution's authority depends on "the consent of the people of each individual State, not the consent of the undifferentiated people of the Nation as a whole," and argued that on the question of whether the qualifications clause is exclusive, "The Constitution is simply silent...And where the Constitution is silent, it raises no bar to action by the States or the people."
|
|
|