Thank God for the United States Supreme Court, which would never uphold such a vague and weaselly standard.
“This is someone who has fallen into the category of fomenting hatred, of such extreme views and expressing them in such a way that it is actually likely to cause inter-community tension or even violence if that person were allowed into the country,” Ms Smith told BBC Breakfast.
Named and shamed: the 16 barred from UK – UK Politics, UK – The Independent.
This is one of the places where intent of the founders becomes tricky to parse. Did they envisage a District of Columbia large enough to need a representative? Doubtful. Would they have been willing to allow hundreds of thousands of mostly African-American citizens to be permanently disenfranchised? Er, yes…
I wonder if the 14th Amendment doesn’t play a role here as well.
Questions over the constitutionality of a D.C. voting bill have dogged the proposal throughout its journey through Congress. Some legal experts say that because the District is not a state, the proposal does not square with a constitutional requirement that House members be chosen “every second year by the people of the several states.” Others argue that the Constitution gives Congress broad power over the District, including the ability to grant it a full House seat.
via Some in Justice Department See D.C. Vote in House as Unconstitutional – washingtonpost.com.
Recent Comments