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

To: mrsmith

":I asume Delay offered such "facts" from "another public record"."

Why don't you read the decision instead of assuming?

The only factor claimed to make him 'ineligible' is his alleged non-residency. The problem being that the Constitution says residency only matters on the date of election. Given that DeLay maintains a residence in Texas (his wife is living there), it is far from clear he *isn't* a 'resident' of Texas for election purposes.

DeLay is simply trying to avoid the penalty for withdrawing (no GOP replacement candidate allowed) by claiming to be non-resident, and having the GOP executive declare him ineligible by such non-residency. The problem is they can't legally make that decision, since the Constitution isn't something that a state political party can overturn by fiat.

--R.


135 posted on 07/06/2006 12:13:17 PM PDT by RustMartialis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies ]


To: RustMartialis
Of course I haven't been able to read the ruling. Neither have you or anyone else.

Does the name "Dick Cheney" ring a bell with you?"

'Judge Sidney Fitzwater in Dallas ... went on to rule that Mr. Cheney cannot be considered an inhabitant of Texas, given his "intent that Wyoming be his place of habitation." This intent was evidenced, in part, by his notification to "the United States Secret Service that his primary residence is his home in Jackson Hole, Wyoming."
This ruling was affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on December 7, 2000.'

148 posted on 07/06/2006 12:56:27 PM PDT by mrsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | 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