johnnyrocket
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Apr-17-05 03:29 PM
Original message |
Question: Couldn't the Dems SUE the GOP if they go nuclear? |
|
Because by all accounts, it's ILLEGAL to change the Senate rules without a 2/3 vote. They could take the 'rule' change the GOP pushes through, and go straight to the Supreme Court and argue the rule change in wholly unconstitutional! The Supremes could overrule the change.
|
BillZBubb
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Apr-17-05 03:35 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Because of separation of powers, the SC could not interfere. |
|
Unless it specifically says in the Constitution that 2/3 vote or 60% or whatever, is required to change how the Senate does things, the Court cannot intervene.
|
Vincardog
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Apr-17-05 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. Don't forget this is the same 4 black robes that gave us george 2000 |
tritsofme
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Apr-17-05 03:41 PM
Response to Original message |
3. The courts rarely get involved with rules of each congressional chamber |
|
Edited on Sun Apr-17-05 03:42 PM by tritsofme
Because Article I Section 5 states:
Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings...
|
Yupster
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Apr-17-05 03:52 PM
Response to Original message |
|
that by all accounts you need 2/3rds to change the senate rules.
By precedent perhaps, but the Constitution is pretty clear about listing places where a super-majority is needed.
For instance to pass a Constitutional amendment you need 2/3rds of each house and 3/4 of the state legislatures.
On rules, all the Constitution says is each house can make its own rules. If the Constitution meant by a 2/3rds vote, it would have said so.
The damage here needs to be political, not legal. It needs to hurt them vote-wise if they force through the change. It needs to cost them votes for over-reaching.
|
ourbluenation
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Apr-17-05 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
5. forget the dems - could a citizen file a suit? |
|
I mean these people are given power by us, really, if you think about it. They serve the people and the people maybe think this is illegal...
|
tritsofme
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Apr-17-05 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
7. On what basis or grounds? |
|
Would you file a suit?
They're not breaking any laws per se, just breaking with tradition and stretching rules to their maximum.
|
Fire Walk With Me
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Apr-17-05 11:06 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
8. We could say that someone, somewhere got a blow job. |
|
We all know that this is the basis of all evil, and the nation and lawmakers will rally around us to root out said evil.
|
ISUGRADIA
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Apr-17-05 11:02 PM
Response to Original message |
6. Courts are NOT going to get into Senate rules! |
|
there's a strong separation of powers tradition and something like this they would not touch with a ten foot pole. The senate rules are not listed in the constitution so the courts will defer to the senate.
|
Charon
(321 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-18-05 08:55 AM
Response to Original message |
|
Don't think so. The Constitution states the House and Senate are free to make their own rules for managing business. The "Nuclear Option is in fact a rule change which by current Senate rules only requires 51%. There appears to be no legal basis to sue on.
|
theboss
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-18-05 09:09 AM
Response to Original message |
|
The Senate is free to make its own rules. There is no way the courts would get involved in this. It's a Separation of Powers issue.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Tue Apr 30th 2024, 07:23 AM
Response to Original message |