[mquinn]

That’s one of those fun-to-discuss quirks of the Constitution that probably isn’t actually true.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2013/01/john_boehner_re_elected_speaker_of_house_of_representatives_does_the_speaker.html

[thesharkboy]

That’s very interesting. Thank you for the link. It’s also interesting that, for once, Slate considers the intentions of the Founding Fathers!

[Republican Wildcat]

Interesting take, though it would probably be impossible to challenge as the House governs its own affairs if they elected a nonmember as Speaker since there is nothing explicit to rule it out.

Although going along with the take that it was simply something that was understood as written, that is similar to the fact that the Chief Justice is a member of the Supreme Court, although it doesn’t actually say that in the Constitution. The Court is created, and a Chief Justice is an office mentioned as being required to preside over an impeachment Senate trial of a President, but it doesn’t actually spell out this office is part of the Supreme Court.