Posted on 03/26/2007 7:38:57 AM PDT by no dems
many thanks...
Thanks for the link, WW. The document you linked is a letter expressing the private opinions of exactly two, presumably Republican members of the Louisiana State legislature. Any decision on Breaux's eligibility will be made by the State judiciary to whom this letter is a complete irrelevancy.
As for their argument regarding eligibility itself, they list the commonly accepted facts (Breaux's place of voter registration and his primary residence, both Maryland) and state that this proves he is not a citizen of Louisiana as defined by "the Diversity of Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution".
Being a careful and long-time observer of that unique brand of obstinate jackassery for which Louisiana is infamous, I Googled the phrase "Diversity of Citizenship Clause" and discovered (1) the 14th Amendment contains no such clause (2) there is a clause commonly referred to by that name elsewhere in the Constitution (Article III, Section 2), but (3) this Article III clause seems to have no pertinence to the issues at hand.
This all is entirely par for the course and in no way informs the observer as to whether the Louisiana State judiciary will decide Breaux is eligible to run if petitioned to make a ruling on the subject.
I don't care about the "Diversity of Citizenship" clause, existent or not. If the FACTS are as given in the letter, those FACTS prove that he is in violation of the Louisiana requirement that he be a citizen of the state. I don't know what further evidence would be needed. Registering to vote in Maryland REQUIRES that he become a citizen of Maryland. The "homestead exemption" is icing on the cake.
I don't believe that even a Lousiana lawyer could decide differently (and BTW, I'm from Louisiana--born, raised, and lived there for fifty-four years--so I am intimately familiar with the idiocies of Louisiana politics).
We all know, my FRiend, that laws never apply to demonRATS.
Attorney General Charles Foti will approve the request for Breaux's eligibility, and State Supreme Court Chief Justice Pascal Calogero will uphold it.
The "Good ol' Boy" network will show its colors once again...
Edwin Edwards and the Long family would be so proud...
Our esteemed Louisiana legislators who wrote the preposterous letter to which you linked made reference to the "Diversity of Citizenship clause" for the purpose of defining the word "citizen" as used in the Louisiana Constitution. However, their argument holds no water for the reasons I gave in my previous comment.
The problem here is that the Louisiana Constitution simply does not define the word "citizen". You state, no doubt based on your own estimate of the requirements of common sense, that if Breaux votes in Maryland and resides mostly in a home in Maryland, then he is not a "citizen" of Louisiana. That is one man's opinion (which I happen to share, so make that two men, I guess). But again the Louisiana Constitution is silent on these things.
Breaux has and will pronounce himself a citizen of Louisiana based on his ancestors' long residence there, his birth there, his public service to the state, his ownership of property (and paying of property taxes) there, his deep love for the place, whatever. Eventually, if Breaux runs, a judge will decide.
My experience tells me that in a Louisiana case where one party is named Breaux, or Boudreaux, or Chachere, etc. and the other party is named Jindal, or Rajneesh, or Macaca, etc., there are many, many Louisiana judges who will rule in favor of Breaux simply because that is what seems just to them, especially if the matter at hand is defining who is or isn't a Louisianian. In fact, it is to no small degree on account of just such nonsense that I myself left Louisiana as a very young man and have never resided there again since. That's all I'm saying. In Louisiana, blood over-rides all else.
The Louisiana Constitution may be "silent" on the issue, but I am sure that there is case law at the state and federal level to determine who qualifies as a citizen of a state. The little searching I have done says that it is decided by "domicile", which is more than simply owning a residential property. Voting and having a homestead exemption would appear to clinch the issue that Breaux's "domicile" is in Maryland, and hence that he is a citizen of Maryland and not Louisiana.
Breaux is running. This is bad. It makes the Jindal candidacy much more difficult and expensive.
I thought that since he had not been a citizen of LA for 5 years, LA law would prohibit Breaux from running.
Look for a court challenge.
Some more information on Louisiana law and “citizenship”:
Geaux Bobby! Bayou masala, baby!
You mean he might be a good candidate in 2012 as Fred Thompson will serve only one term, right?
Jindal will be president of the United States within 15 years...there is no doubt. The key point is that he is the brightest and most intelligent politician in the US today.
That's why the political cost has to be driven up. Tom DeLay provides a provides a recent, neighboring state example. The ads wouldn't be hard to write. DeLay wanted to pull a late residency switcheroo. That one was admittedly a close call but the courts wouldn't let him do it. Now John Breaux wants a five year wink and a nod?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.