Posted on 03/02/2004 9:55:52 PM PST by knak
The problem is, that Article II, Section I, Claus 5 presents a list of "qualifications" for the office of President. Amendment 22 was written with Article II, Amendment 12, and Amendment 20 in mind.
The proviso in Amendment 12, in the last sentence, was designed as a clarification. The Vice President had to meet the same qualifications as the President, rather than those outlined for a Senator. Prior to Amendment 12, the Vice President was the second-place finisher in the Electoral College. The Framers of the Constitution had not anticipated the rise of political parties. Now that the office of Vice President was to be voted on itself (in the Electoral College), the qualifications had to be clearly defined. And so they were ... the same as the President.
Exactly!
"But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States."
Within five minutes I had a lengthy response, indicating that many others had already responded to him.
I again responded, with the following:
In my view, the 22nd Am. simply added another cause for ineligibility. The 22nd Am. is, after all, part of the Constitution.
To claim otherwise is to impose too literal a reading on Art. II and the 22nd Am., which the courts have been loathe to do e.g. does a flag really speak (see the 1st Am. and flag burning)?
I've had no further response. I assume that Gillers has gotten the message.
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.