It's a speculative proposition one way or another.

The answer is, at any determinative crossroads, the Constitution must be assumed as intending to support our republican governance, not to destroy or disable it. Opening the Presidency to total disability via partisan whims of a single rogue state legal system (as we've witnessed in NY) would empower the latter to occupy a POTUS and VPOTUS in a state courtroom during most of their tenor in office. As we've seen that occupation could come complete with gag orders and mandatory courtroom presence, regardless of national demand.

You may believe that to be Constitutional intent. I don't.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by SlowFlowPro

Simple Solutions to Complex Probs

Member since Jan 2004

424516 posts

Posted on 4/30/24 at 11:47 am to NC_Tigah

quote:
It's a speculative proposition one way or another.

Why?

It's the exact same clause of the Constitution. Nothing in that clause separates a President from a federal judge (or any other office).

quote:
You may believe that to be Constitutional intent. I don't.

I mean the original Constitutional intent was granting states a much larger amount of power than fedgov. Less than the AOC, but still state-dominated in terms of power.

Our Bill of Rights basically did not even apply to the states until long after (which really started with the 14A, which, clearly, changed the constitution). The 10th Amendment actually had power back in those days, especially pre-Civil War.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by NC_Tigah

Carolinas

Member since Sep 2003

124349 posts

Posted on 4/30/24 at 1:16 pm to SlowFlowPro

quote:
I mean the original Constitutional intent was granting states a much larger amount of power than fedgov.

Irrelevant.

Could Southern States objecting to Lincoln as POTUS simply have created ruse criminal charges against him, and kept him in southern courthouses under a gag order during the entirety of his Presidency?

By your measure the Constitution says they could.

Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Return To Board