BamaD
Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: EdBowie
How would a majority write-in vote followed by the needed electoral college votes (if it happened) not 'be elected'?
quote:
ORIGINAL: joether
This is a purely hypothetical discussion; let that be stated straight out.
This came up in another thread, and wished to discuss what sort of things might come up with the forum goers. The issue is to due with a popular US President seeking a third term. I use President Obama since 1 ) I like him, and 2 ) He's the current US President (knowledge on and about him is fresh in people's minds). The person in the White House could be any previous President or one yet to be named. However, the amount of 'fresh' view or relevant to the current political dynamics of the country might make it harder.
During the next general election, the people of the nation vote for the current President rather than the Democrat elected in the primaries at the DNC party a few months earlier to the vote date. Normally the 22nd Amendment would come into play here:
22nd Amendment:
Section 1.
No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.
By the wording of the 22nd, the issue seems 'open and shut' right? Not quite. Since a vote is essentially one person's direct exercising of their 1st amendment rights of 'Freedom of Speech'. The 22nd was put in place shortly after FDR left the White House in the 1940's. And attempts to repeal it have taken place since that time. There is a whole history about the 22nd amendment like all other amendments; and that maybe helpful to review. But the 22nd amendment was to PREVENT someone from running for a third term in office, right? Well, if tens of millions of people write in 'Barack Obama' when the guy was not running, would it be a 22nd amendment issue? Not directly no. And yet, it is given the definition presented in the 22nd amendment.
I believe the matter would be sent to the US Supreme Court for a decision. And those nine people would have a very rough job. Since it would set two questions before the Court:
1 ) Could voters on their own circumvent an Amendment with a write-in?
2 ) Which Amendment trumps the other? If the 1st trumps the 22nd, does that then mean any Amendments that come after others have less 'standing'? Or does the 'letter of the law' supersede 'freedom of speech'?
Because him taking office a third time is unconstitutional.
It would be as if the majority voted for say Prince William.
He simply would not be meet the standards to be president.
In William's case it would be citizenship.
In Obama's he would have served the full number of terms allowed.
_____________________________
Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine
People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.
|
An Obama 3rd Term - .gif){kind=avatar}
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread