• Economy
  • Editor’s Pick
Money Rise Today – Investing and Stock News
  • Investing
  • Stock
Editor's Pick

JONATHAN TURLEY: House ‘delegate’ shows her confusion over Constitution

by January 5, 2025
written by January 5, 2025

Editor’s note: This essay was first published on the author’s blog: Res ipsa loquitur – The thing itself speaks.

‘This body and this nation has [sic] a territories and a colonies problem.’ Those words from Del. Stacey Plaskett echoed in the House chamber this week as the delegate interrupted the election of the House speaker to demand voting rights for herself and the representatives of other non-states. The problem, however, is not with the House, but with Plaskett and other members in demanding the violation of Article I of the Constitution.

After her election in 2015, Plaskett has often shown a certain disregard for constitutional principles and protections. Despite being a lawyer, Plaskett has insisted in Congress that hate speech is not constitutionally protected, a demonstrably false assertion. Where there is overwhelming evidence of a censorship system that a court called ‘Orwellian,’ Plaskett has repeatedly denied the evidence presented before her committee.  When a journalist testified on the evidence of that censorship system, Plaskett suggested his possible arrest. (Plaskett suggested that respected journalist journalist Matt Taibbi had committed perjury due to an error that he made, not in testimony but in a tweet that he later corrected).

However, ignoring the free speech or free press values pales in comparison to what Plaskett was suggesting this week in nullifying critical language in Article I.

Article I, Section 2, states:

‘The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch in the States Legislature.’

The ability to vote in the House is expressly limited to the elected representatives of ‘the several states.’

Nevertheless, as the vote was being taken on the eventual election of Speaker Mike Johnson (R., La.), Plaskett rose to demand recognition and to know why she was not allowed to vote:

‘I note that the names of representatives from American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and the District of Columbia were not called, representing, collectively, 4 million Americans. Mr. Speaker, collectively, the largest per capita of veterans in this country.’

The language of the Constitution is clear and unambiguous. Absent an amendment to the Constitution, only states may vote on the floor of the United States House of Representatives.

The presiding member asked a rather poignant question in response: ‘Does the gentlelady have a problem?’

The answer was decidedly ‘yes.’

Plaskett responded, ‘I asked why they were not called. I asked why they were not called from the parliamentarian, please.’

The response was obvious:

‘Delegates-elect and the resident commissioner-elect are not qualified to vote/ Representatives-elect are the only individuals qualified to vote in the election of the speaker. As provided in Section 36 of the House rules and manual, the speaker is elected by a majority of the members-elect voting by surname.’

Plaskett then declared, ‘This body and this nation has a territory and a colonies problem. What was supposed to be temporary has now, effectively, become permanent. We must do something about this.’

As Plaskett’s mic was cut off, she objected, ‘But I have a voice!’ as Democrats gave her a standing ovation. The media joined in the adoration, including The Atlantic magazine, which referred to her as ‘Congresswoman Plaskett’ rather than a delegate.

There is no question that the Virgin Islands have a high percentage of veterans for its population (which stands at only 104,000). It is also a cherished part of our country. But it is not a state.

Plaskett was demanding a floor vote for herself and delegates from American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and Washington, D.C.

These delegates are currently allowed to vote only in committees. The House is permitted to grant such authority since these delegates are not actually voting on the final language or adoption of legislation.

What Democrats were supporting was to allow votes on the House floor, which would have collapsed the bright-line rule that has governed the body for decades. It would also have effectively removed the language referencing ‘states’ from Article I, Section 2, without a constitutional amendment.

This is why Plaskett’s ‘problem’ goes further than simply the selection of the Speaker.

The Democrats have long argued that delegates should be allowed to vote as full members, starting with the D.C. delegate. I have written previously on that issue in academic publications. See, e.g., Jonathan Turley, Too Clever By Half: The Partial Representation of the District of Columbia in the House of Representatives, 76 George Washington University Law Review 305-374 (2008). I also testified at the prior congressional hearings (here and here and here) and written columns (here and here) on why I considered the bill to be flagrantly unconstitutional.

It is neither pleasant nor popular to raise such constitutional objections. I received heat after one Senate hearing in which Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton told the senators that, if they were going to vote against this bill, ‘do not blame the Framers, blame Jonathan Turley.’ However, the problem has always been the curious constitutional status of these districts and territories.

The language of the Constitution is clear and unambiguous. Absent an amendment to the Constitution, only states may vote on the floor of the United States House of Representatives.

The problem is not, as claimed by Del. Plaskett, with ‘colonies.’ The Virgin Islands is not a ‘colony.’ It can, at any time, move to become an independent nation. Otherwise, the American people would have to vote for this tiny island to be a state. Either way, citizens will choose the status of the island.

The Democrats giving Plaskett a standing ovation would have presumably added half a dozen new votes for non-states. The call would likely then be for the addition of some representation in the Senate. That would certainly give the Democrats control of the House, but it would allow a fluid definition of what constitutes a representative — a definition that could be manipulated in the future by the majority to maintain their control of the House.

The vote for speaker illustrates the problem. Short a couple of votes, the Democrats were demanding the recognition of new forms of representatives to elect Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York. Presumably, a future House could then remove the votes to achieve the same advantage. It could also recognize other territories to increase voting margins. (Notably, some liberal professors have also suggested dividing blue states to simply multiply Democratic votes in the Senate. That would be constitutional if it was allowed by Congress).

The call to create new forms of voting members on the House floor is consistent with the ad hoc measures in other areas. For example, despite opposition from the public, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and others have pushed to simply pack the Court with a majority of liberal justices to support their agenda.

The public’s opposition to court packing has not deterred the Democrats. In the same way, unable to secure a majority of citizens to support D.C. statehood, the Democrats previously sought to create a voting member without a constitutional amendment or change in status.

This week, they would have accomplished that result not just for Washington, but other non-states, including the Northern Mariana Islands, a commonwealth covering only 180 miles with a population of less than 50,000.

We have the oldest and most stable constitutional system in the world precisely because we have resisted improvisational or ad hoc measures to achieve political ends. The Constitution is a common article of faith that transcends our passing or petty divisions. These demands for constructive constitutional amendments are the voices of the faithless.

To paraphrase Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, ‘the fault dear [delegate] lies not in our [states] but in ourselves.’

Related Topics

Opinion
House Of Representatives Politics
House of Representatives Democrats

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
0 comment
0
FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail

previous post
Who is Giorgia Meloni? Trump hosts Italian PM at Mar-a-Lago
next post
JOE CONCHA: Biden’s disgraceful Oprah-ization of medals that once meant something

related articles

Cambodia to nominate Trump for Nobel Peace Prize...

August 2, 2025

Recess on ice as Republicans hunker down for...

August 1, 2025

Trump moves nuclear submarines weeks after praising sub’s...

August 1, 2025

WATCH: Trump says he is hopeful Hillary Clinton...

August 1, 2025

Iran says it has ‘plenty of scientists’ left...

August 1, 2025

Trump repositions 2 nuclear submarines after ‘highly provocative’...

August 1, 2025

Trump endorses ‘MAGA warrior’ for RNC chairman after...

August 1, 2025

Kavanaugh cites 3 presidents in explaining Supreme Court’s...

August 1, 2025

China’s growing nuclear arsenal aims to break US...

August 1, 2025

Trump ally Bukele’s party amends El Salvador constitution...

August 1, 2025
Enter Your Information Below To Receive Free Trading Ideas, Latest News, And Articles.


Your information is secure and your privacy is protected. By opting in you agree to receive emails from us. Remember that you can opt-out any time, we hate spam too!

Latest News

  • Israel begins ground operation in Hamas stronghold of Rafah, expands activities in Gaza

    March 20, 2025
  • Senate committee advances nomination of Dr Oz to run Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services

    March 25, 2025
  • FBI reopening investigation into cocaine found at Biden White House

    May 27, 2025
  • Jeffrey Epstein case reopens focus on Ghislaine Maxwell as deputy AG steps in

    July 22, 2025
  • Federal judge delays Labor Department’s request to block DOGE access

    February 14, 2025

Popular Posts

  • 1

    Secret Service admits leaning on ‘state and local partners’ after claim it ignored Trump team’s past requests

    July 21, 2024
  • 2

    Five more House Democrats call on Biden to drop out, third US senator

    July 19, 2024
  • 3

    Elon and Vivek should tackle US funding for this boondoogle organization and score a multimillion dollar win

    December 4, 2024
  • 4

    Forex Profit Calculator: Maximize Your Trading Potential

    July 10, 2024
  • 5

    Biden calls to ‘lower the temperature’ then bashes Trump in NAACP speech

    July 17, 2024

Categories

  • Economy (829)
  • Editor's Pick (5,603)
  • Investing (634)
  • Stock (867)

Latest Posts

  • Amazon set to pass Walmart in revenue for first time

    February 6, 2025
  • HHS will reevaluate programs, regulations to ensure taxpayer funds are not paying for elective abortions

    January 28, 2025
  • Key Trump voting bloc has concerns with MAHA report, as Trump officials give assurances

    May 26, 2025

Recent Posts

  • Dogecoin and Shiba Inu continue to descend to new lows

    August 1, 2024
  • Bank of Japan Impact: Yen Weakens, Japan Stocks Rise

    August 13, 2024
  • S&P 500 Surge: Market Shift and Economic Impact

    August 9, 2024

Editor’s Pick

  • ‘FOOD BABE’ VANI HARI: Don’t boo the MAHA movement. Our health and safety are bigger than bureaucrats’ egos

    April 5, 2025
  • King Charles sends personal message of congratulations to Trump on swearing-in

    January 21, 2025
  • The one characteristic of Reagan and Trump that sets them apart from other presidents

    July 28, 2024
  • About us
  • Contacts
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions

Disclaimer: moneyrisetoday.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

Copyright © 2025 moneyrisetoday.com | All Rights Reserved

Money Rise Today – Investing and Stock News
  • Economy
  • Editor’s Pick
Money Rise Today – Investing and Stock News
  • Investing
  • Stock