Also critical to the issue is the 17th Amendment , which transferred power to select US Senators from the state legislature, to the people of the state:. The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote.
The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures. Term Limits claimed that Amendment 73 was "a permissible exercise of state power under the Elections Clause ". Both the trial court and the Arkansas Supreme Court agreed with Hill, declaring Amendment 73 unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court affirmed by a vote. The majority and minority articulated different views of the character of the federal structure established in the Constitution.
Writing for the majority, Justice John Paul Stevens concluded that:. Finally, state-imposed restrictions, unlike the congressionally imposed restrictions at issue in Powell, violate a third idea central to this basic principle: Following the adoption of the 17th Amendment in , this ideal was extended to elections for the Senate. The Congress of the United States, therefore, is not a confederation of nations in which separate sovereigns are represented by appointed delegates, but is instead a body composed of representatives of the people.
He further ruled that sustaining Amendment 73 would result in "a patchwork of state qualifications" for U. Representatives, and described that consequence as inconsistent with "the uniformity and national character that the framers sought to ensure.
Justice Clarence Thomas , in dissent, countered that:. It is ironic that the Court bases today's decision on the right of the people to "choose whom they please to govern them. The thinking goes that once a lawmaker spends too much time in Washington, he or she becomes part of Washington and incapable of effectively serving people outside of it.
So let's put a limit on how long they can be in Washington. But three of those proposals, as the New York Times reported at the time , even failed to get a bare majority. There really hasn't been a major push for term limits since. Some lawmakers have decided to impose their own term limits. But history is littered with broken term-limit promises. But in , he was back, saying the idea of term limits is flawed unless everyone agrees to them. We're picking on Salmon, but lots of lawmakers have and continue to run for office despite making campaign pledges to leave office at a certain date.
In other words, proposing term limits for Congress is a popular thing to say on the campaign trail. And of all the reasons Trump's term-limit proposal won't happen, this is probably the most salient: Congress doesn't want it. Nominates federal judges Confirms or rejects federal judicial nominations. But three of those proposals as the New York Times reported at the time, even failed to get a bare majority. You are commenting using your WordPress.
You are commenting using your Twitter account. You are commenting using your Facebook account. Notify me of new comments via email. Main menu Skip to content. The Supreme Court term-limit laws unconstitutional. Posted on April 19, by shechaimspeaks. Uncategorized Leave a comment. Leave a Reply Cancel reply Enter your comment here
U.S. District Judge William L. Dwyer, in a broad ruling, said the Washington term limits initiative was unconstitutional because it wrongly attempted to add qualifications for congressional candidates beyond those stipulated in the Constitution -- age, citizenship and residency in the state represented.
There have been congressional term limits. If fact, U.S. Senators and Representatives from 23 states faced term limits from to , when the U.S. Supreme Court declared the practice unconstitutional with its decision in the case of U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton.
May 23, · Four versions of a proposed term-limits amendment failed in the House of Representatives on March 29 after months of debate. With constitutional amendments requiring approval by two-thirds of each house of Congress and three-quarters of the state legislatures, three of the proposals that the House considered failed to get even a bare majority. Watch video · That means that for congressional term limits to become legal again, Congress would have to amend the Constitution. Trump proposed a constitutional amendment during the campaign, and one member of Congress, Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.), has a bill out now to do that. 2. Changing the Constitution is really, really hard.
Apr 19, · (1)- The Supreme Court says passing term-limit laws is unconstitutional. In , the Supreme Court decided in a 5 to 4 vote that states or Congress can’t just make a law limiting the number of terms members of Congress can serve. The decision essentially wiped off the books term-limit laws that 23 states had for their congressional delegations. U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, U.S. , was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that states cannot impose qualifications for prospective members of the U.S. Congress stricter than those specified in the Constitution. The decision invalidated the Congressional term limit provisions of 23 states. The parties to the case were U.S. Term Limits, a non-profit advocacy group, .