Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486 (1969) Similar case to Moore threats

Justicia ^ | June 16, 1969 | Supreme Court

[Mechanicos]

"Petitioner Powell, who had been duly elected to serve in the House of Representatives for the 90th Congress, was denied his seat by the adoption of House Resolution No. 278 which the Speaker had ruled was on the issue of excluding Powell and could be decided by majority vote.

[Mechanicos]

Similar case to the threats the Swamp is making against Moore to expel him if he wins. They are bluffing

[Az Joe]

Nonsense argument since no one is talking about not seating Moore. The Senate has supreme, unreviewable power to expel him.

[orionrising]

The republican senate does not want to hold the majority... there is no reason to push him to drop out. They can push him to resign after election triggering another special election and gubernatorial temp appointment rather then giving the seat to the dems.

[buckalfa]

McConnell is not bluffing.

[RetiredTexasVet]

He is really pissed, without Luther Strange the sexual trysts in the Senate Cloakroom will not be the same.

[Baldwin77]

I think McConnell could certainly be challenged.

Will he do the same to Melendez?

Alabama has the right to pick their senator. That would be grounds for seceding. The voters would have their votes being denied.

[Mechanicos]

read the case, no they do not it violates the Constitution

[Clinging Bitterly]

Just now? Those clowns haven't represented the people who elect them for decades, what difference would it make if they chose to seat whomever they please regardless of how a state/district voted? I say it would be darn little.

I fear this republic is about to throw a rod...

[mrsmith]

The case is NOT about expelling, but refusing to seat, someone who was elected.
They’ll have to seat him.

I expect the Republican Caucus to not allow him to join. leaving him without committee seats or other normal privileges.
And an ethics investigation that does not result in expulsion.\

But even a lone Senator has power.

[Az Joe]

You read the case dip....The case does not address expelling someone from congress it only addresses seating the person..

[Repeal 16-17]

The Senate has supreme, unreviewable power to expel him.

That issue has never been litigated. The expulsion power is in the same clause giving each House of Congress the power to make and enforce its procedural rules. This suggests that the expulsion power is limited to expelling a Senator or Representative who violates those rules. Reading this power to allow a House of Congress to expel a member for any reason would allow a House of Congress to perpetually deny a State of any representation by simply expelling its Senators/Representatives as soon as they are sworn in.

Powell v. McCormack narrowly read this clause regarding each House's power to judge a member's "Qualifications" for office. I suspect the Supreme Court would similarly read the expulsion power in a narrow way.

[WASCWatch]

No, the Senate cannot expel him unless he does not meet the Constitutional qualifications> I’m pretty Sure Moore is at least 30 years old, has been a citizen if the United States for 9 years; and, is a resident of Alabama when he is elected.

[Mechanicos]

In it you will see that actions from conduct before entry into the Senate are prohibited, and the reasons for expulsion are stated (Treason, mental illness, physical, etc) none of which apply against Moore. The Constitution is still above the Senate.

[jjotto]

Fifteen US Senators have been expelled by two-thirds vote of the US Senate.

[jjotto]

SC would likely not hear it at all. Like the impeachment of a president, it is acknowledged to be a strictly political question.

[Svartalfiar]

read the case, no they do not it violates the Constitution

Yes, they do. You read the case - they don't delve into the question of expulsion, only the exclusion, or refusal to seat him. Several of the bullet points specifically mention that. They could have seated him then expelled him perfectly fine.

[Svartalfiar]

In it you will see that actions from conduct before entry into the Senate are prohibited, and the reasons for expulsion are stated (Treason, mental illness, physical, etc) none of which apply against Moore. The Constitution is still above the Senate.

Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.

No, they don't. They simply state that House members have viewed pre-election conduct as not grounds for expulsion, but that's nowhere in the Constitution or any law - simply their made-up rules and proceedings. And, if you read the Constitution above, the only restriction on expulsion is a 2/3 vote. Your treason/illness are stuff that comes from where? I'm not seeing anything about that anywhere in the Constitution.

[Svartalfiar]

No, the Senate cannot expel him unless he does not meet the Constitutional qualifications> I’m pretty Sure Moore is at least 30 years old, has been a citizen if the United States for 9 years; and, is a resident of Alabama when he is elected.

No, they cannot seat him if he doesn't meet the qualifications, and the lawsuit found that those are exclusionary - they cannot refuse to seat for any other reason.
Expelling him, on the other hand, they can do anytime they choose, for any reason, as long as 2/3 of them agree to. There are no other restrictions on expulsion.

[Mechanicos]

They list reasons for such actions, they have to seat him, and hes still will be a Senator representing AL

[Mechanicos]

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/11/15/susan-collins-no-choice-seat-judge-roy-moore-wins/