Basically correct. As I explained to @byamberphillips here, there's a longstanding norm against expelling for conduct known to voters at the time of election, but in my view it's defeasible.https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/11/13/how-senate-republicans-could-kick-roy-moore-out-of-the-senate/ …
-
-
-
I agree that this norm exists and is not absolute. That being said, this strikes me as a weak case for making an exception.
-
Mike — in your view, what would a strong case be?
-
After that, conduct relating to abuse of public office, not fully known to voters and/or having occurred in the somewhat recent past would seem to be significant factors.
-
But in those cases wouldn’t prosecution be the better remedy, in the first instance? With Moore, by contrast, it’s time-barred.
-
Bear in mind that the rights we are trying to protect here are not Moore's, but those of the voters who (hypothetically) decide to elect him despite knowing the relevant facts.
-
Yes, I agree that this is a tougher dilemma than most folks seem to think based on today’s twitter.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Problem is Powell v. McCormack 395 U.S. 486 (1969).http://dailywrit.com/2008/12/does-the-senate-have-the-authority-to-refuse-to-seat-a-blagojevich-appointee/ …
-
No, Powell limits exclusion. They are talking about expulsion, which is not similarly limited.
-
Excellent point. I missed that distinction. (Should I have actually reread the case after 31 years?)
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.