Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: V_TWIN

I think constitutionally the House is the sole judge of its
membership.

If so, then the courts have no jurisdiction to tell the House that
it can’t censor one of its own.


5 posted on 04/23/2013 11:09:48 AM PDT by CondorFlight (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: CondorFlight

AGREED.


6 posted on 04/23/2013 11:17:41 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: CondorFlight
I agree.

But Scotus did not when it came to Rangel's predecessor, Adam Clayton Powell, another Harlem scumbag.

Adam Clayton Powell pecked at his fellow representatives from his unassailable perch in New York's Harlem. Powell had been embroiled in controversy inside and outside Washington. When Powell failed to heed civil proceedings against him in New York, a judge held him in criminal contempt. His problems were only beginning. He won reelection in 1966 but the House of Representatives voted to exclude him.

Powell v. McCormack/Opinion of the Court.

Conclusion.

To summarize, we have determined the following: (1) This case has not been mooted by Powell's seating in the 91st Congress. (2) Although this action should be dismissed against respondent Congressmen, it mayb e sustained against their agents. (3) The 90th Congress' denial of membership to Powell cannot be treated as an expulsion. (4) We have jurisdiction over the subject matter of this controversy. (5) The case is justiciable.

Further, analysis of the 'textual commitment' under Art. I, § 5 (see Part VI, B (1)), has demonstrated that in judging the qualifications of its members Congress is limited to the standing qualifications prescribed in the Constitution. Respondents concede that Powell met these. Thus, there is no need to remand this case to determine whether he was entitled to be seated in the 90th Congress. Therefore, we hold that, since Adam Clayton Powell, Jr., was duly elected by the voters of the 18th Congressional District of New York and was not ineligible to serve under any provision of the Constitution, the House was without power to exclude him from its membership.

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Powell_v._McCormack/Opinion_of_the_Court

Now, Rangel was censured and not booted from Congress like Powell, but Scotus got away with overturning a decision by three fourths of the House of Reps.

9 posted on 04/23/2013 11:20:14 AM PDT by Jacquerie (How few were left who had seen the republic! - Tacitus, The Annals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: CondorFlight

You are exactly right. This is an internal act by a separate branch or government and I don’t think the courts have a say in it. But what the heck, this black ass and the rest of the democrats haven’t a clue what the Constitution says


13 posted on 04/23/2013 12:01:36 PM PDT by falcon99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson