Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Democratic Primaries
Showing Original Post only (View all)A Joe Biden/Barack Obama ticket passes Constitutional muster according to legal experts [View all]
But what about the 22nd Amendment that forbids someone from RUNNING for POTUS for a third term?
Michael Dorf, a professor at Cornell Law School, gave his opinion on the issue in an interview with the Washington Post in 2015.
The drafters of this language [of the 22nd Amendment] knew the difference between getting elected to an office and holding an office, Dorf explained. They could have just said no person may hold the office of president more than twice. But they didnt.
Indeed, Dorf even signaled that the present-day Supreme Courts hands would be tied on the matter. In a case from 1968, the Court ruled eligibility requirements that restrict people from running for federal office had to be read with a narrow interpretation that is, the letter of the law mattered more than a broad interpretation of the rules. To rule differently now would thwart the established precedent created more than 50 years ago.
Looking at the 22nd Amendment with a narrow lens, its clearly written in a way to allow a former president to run as someone elses vice president. It may not have been the collective authors intent for that to have happened, but they didnt consider disallowing it either.
The drafters of this language [of the 22nd Amendment] knew the difference between getting elected to an office and holding an office, Dorf explained. They could have just said no person may hold the office of president more than twice. But they didnt.
Indeed, Dorf even signaled that the present-day Supreme Courts hands would be tied on the matter. In a case from 1968, the Court ruled eligibility requirements that restrict people from running for federal office had to be read with a narrow interpretation that is, the letter of the law mattered more than a broad interpretation of the rules. To rule differently now would thwart the established precedent created more than 50 years ago.
Looking at the 22nd Amendment with a narrow lens, its clearly written in a way to allow a former president to run as someone elses vice president. It may not have been the collective authors intent for that to have happened, but they didnt consider disallowing it either.
https://hillreporter.com/could-joe-biden-pick-barack-obama-as-his-running-mate-in-2020-32771
The Amendment is LITERAL and allows him to serve again. Take that Federalist Society! Those are the words of the Constitution!
President Obama, we need you now to save your legacy.
If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
45 replies, 4846 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (6)
ReplyReply to this post
45 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
A Joe Biden/Barack Obama ticket passes Constitutional muster according to legal experts [View all]
riverine
Jun 2019
OP
I'm willing to bet anything that he is not happy with the jackass liar in the White House and would
riverine
Jun 2019
#4
Nope....It's a nice twist of the 22'nd but....SCOTUS would be 9-0 against this
AncientGeezer
Jun 2019
#6
Out of curiosity, what is your counter-argument to the article and Michael Dorf
mr_lebowski
Jun 2019
#14
You keep trying this...if you've been elected twice...your eligability has run.
AncientGeezer
Jun 2019
#27
Actually it kinda does say JUST that...your twisting it dosen't change that.
AncientGeezer
Jun 2019
#28
Okay, so your entire argument basically involves saying "i'm right, you're wrong" ... over and over.
mr_lebowski
Jun 2019
#37