Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: justiceseeker93

“Even preferable to state laws requiring presidential candidates to prove their constitutional qualifications before being allowed on the ballot would be a federal constitutional amendment requiring the same of all states.”

I suspect an amendment wouldn’t be required, as this would qualify the already existing eligibility requirement, as would a definition of “natural born citizen”.

Congress wouldn’t be adding anything to the U.S.Constitution, just clarifying and expanding within the parameters of one of the eligibility requirements.


95 posted on 03/21/2011 7:07:07 PM PDT by SatinDoll (NO FOREIGN NATIONALS AS OUR PRESIDENT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies ]


To: SatinDoll; rxsid; All
Congress wouldn't be adding anything to the US Constitution [by requiring states to vet prospective presidential (and perhaps other federal) candidates for constitutional qualifications for the office they seek].

I beg to differ with that. There would be something added by such an amendment: a constitutional mandate to state governments to conduct elections for president (and possibly other federal offices) in a specific manner, whereas currently the Constitution (and federal law) is silent on this specific subject, and states have the discretion to check such candidates for constitutional qualifications or not to do so.

Of course, this would not be the first constitutional mandate to state governments, and I wouldn't be concerned about it being considered an abuse of "states' rights," because the states would actually be taking on more authority.

106 posted on 03/21/2011 7:50:18 PM PDT by justiceseeker93
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson