Boy, you give up real quickly.
Why do you think that is likely?
I’m not “giving up”, I think it’s a constitutionally questionable idea that’s stupid anyway and just an excuse to float fantasy Speaker candidates rather than deal with reality. I think it’s implicit that the Speaker needs to be a member. I’m textualist but this interpretation that he/she doesn’t need to be a member is overly literal if you ask me.
As Matthew J. Franck writes: “The point is that parlor-trick textualism is not the most sensible way to interpret the Constitution. Text must be placed in context, and context must be situated in history, and the historic purposes of the Constitution’s makers must be what we seek to understand.”
I think Pelsoi would sue because victory would embarrass the Republicans and force them to choose a new Speaker. And I think the courts would rule in her favor because the courts blow (but I’d be forced to agree with such a ruling).
This is all moot anyway because the House is extremely unlikely to ever elect a non-member Speaker because believe it or not they don’t take their cues from the Internet.