Skip to main content

View Diary: Mr. Burris Is Coming To Washington (402 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The Senate has the right to not seat him (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lysias, bumblebums, lgcap

    in the same way that Bush had the right to use signing statements to modify legislation.  Both are naked power grabs which can be textually justified by smart lawyers.

    The frogurt is also cursed. -8.25, -6.51

    by Superribbie on Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 04:03:23 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Not quite (0+ / 0-)

      Article I, Section 5. Each House shall be the judge of the elections, returns and qualifications of its own members, and a majority of each shall constitute a quorum to do business; but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the attendance of absent members, in such manner, and under such penalties as each House may provide.

      Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two thirds, expel a member.

      There's a question of whether Powell v. McCormack applies in this case, but the only practical meaning that has is determining whether it requires a simple majority or a supermajority to block Burris.

      If 67 Senators vote to oust Burris, he's out.  For any reason or for no reason at all.  That's explicitly laid out in the Constitution as one of the powers of each House of Congress.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site