"I can see the Supreme Court becoming involved in matters concerning Federal representatives, but how in the hell does a Federal judge have the authority over a State legislative body with an issue concerning a Tennessee state representative?"
Not only does a federal judge not have jurisdiction here, a *state* judge wouldn't have jurisdiction either. The TN Senate is the sole judge of the elections, returns and qualifications of its members, and if the Senate rules that Ophelia didn't win the election, then it can exclude her from the Senate. In fact, the Senate can rule that the Republican won the election and seat him, and there's nothing any court can do about it.
Powell v. McCormack was not a case about exclusion of a Representative because the House had ruled that he hadn't won, it was a case in which the House (unconstitutionally)tried to exclude a Representative because he had committed a crime. The Court (correctly) ruled that committing a crime does not mean that one does not meet the constitutional qualifications to be a Representative (i.e., 25 years old, 7 years a U.S. citizen, a resident of the state one represents), and neither Congress nor anyone els can add to the qualifications in the Constitution (this is also why the only way to impose term limits is through a constitutional amendment). While a House of Congress may *expel* (not exclude) a member for any or no reason (such House does not have to prove that such member committed a crime), a 2/3 vote is required to expel a member. In Adam Clayton Powell's case, the House leadership knew that it didn't have the 2/3 vote to expel Powell and thus tried to do an end run around the Constitution, only to be stopped by the Supreme Court.
I hope that activist judge gets impeached for violating his oath of office and exerting illegl jurisdiction in this case. She can't be so stupid as to believe that the judiciary can get involved in an election contest in a state senate; she's doing it knowing full well she is violating the law.
The first state office that former President Carter held, he aquired through the legislature over turning a corrupted election. Carter lost the election but was seated anyway. As a result of the vote fraud they passed a law that you could no longer vote if you had been dead more than three years.
Thanks for your clarification. I guess if Powell had only won by a handful of votes they could've refused to seat him, and once he had been seated they could with a 2/3 vote expel him, but they couldn't refuse to seat him at the beginning of a Congressional term just because they thought he was unsavory. Is that about right?