The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Could a DEM Senator decide to just ignore SEN votes of small GOP states?
Poast new message in this thread
Date: October 22nd, 2021 12:46 PM Author: razzle-dazzle sexy party of the first part * I meant a DEM majority Senate
Its raciss the way Senate contructed. They ignore votes from South Dakota etc. Political question so SC doesnt interfere? |
Date: October 22nd, 2021 12:47 PM Author: burgundy depressive Anything is possible in this 🤡🌏 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947540&forum_id=2#43313899) |
|
Date: October 22nd, 2021 12:48 PM Author: French floppy french chef that would actually trigger a civil war (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947540&forum_id=2#43313906) |
|
Date: October 22nd, 2021 12:49 PM Author: French floppy french chef if you read the Constitution, the one thing that literally CANNOT be amended is the equal representation of states in the Senate. So flouting that seems to rise to a clear issue of Constitutional interpretation
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that [...] no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate. |
 |
Date: October 22nd, 2021 12:50 PM Author: razzle-dazzle sexy party of the first part representation is the bitches arriving at da senate
what if u say their vote is only based on percent of total US population |
|
Date: October 22nd, 2021 12:52 PM Author: Very Tactful Sadistic Corn Cake What if you go back to India and stop destroying white countries? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947540&forum_id=2#43313921) |
|
Date: October 22nd, 2021 12:52 PM Author: French floppy french chef I think "equal Suffrage" would mean an equal number of votes per state, not just having a representative physically at the senate (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947540&forum_id=2#43313924) |
|
Date: October 22nd, 2021 12:54 PM Author: Cerise piazza "Provided that [...] no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate."
Larry Tribe and Lawrence Lessig can offer Dems a theory of "Consent" that vitiates that protection. |
|
Date: October 22nd, 2021 12:55 PM Author: razzle-dazzle sexy party of the first part what is equal suffrage ? honestly that just means elect 2 senators, doesnt mean senate rules cannot dillute their vote.. WE BE STRICT CONSTITTIIONAL NIGGAS (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947540&forum_id=2#43313950) |
|
Date: October 22nd, 2021 1:00 PM Author: French floppy french chef i think you'd have to do something like make the Senate irrelevant rather than specifically diluting the votes of specific states within the Senate to achieve what you want (untrammeled Dem power when they have control of govt). but then you risk getting a Republican house + POTUS can do whatever it wants with no brakes (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947540&forum_id=2#43313975) |
|
Date: October 23rd, 2021 2:54 PM Author: autistic erotic deer antler new version (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947540&forum_id=2#43319235) |
|
Date: October 22nd, 2021 12:55 PM Author: Buck-toothed sound barrier locus Just amend to get rid of senate. Have just the lower house. Checkmate founders. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947540&forum_id=2#43313947) |
|
Date: October 22nd, 2021 1:01 PM Author: French floppy french chef no can do, getting rid of senate completely would violate Article V (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947540&forum_id=2#43313982) |
|
Date: October 23rd, 2021 2:48 PM Author: Buck-toothed sound barrier locus Was joking but isn’t the question what the constitution allows to be amended, not what type of government the constitution currently provides for? Or are you saying the existence of the senate is another provision that can’t be amended? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947540&forum_id=2#43319210) |
|
Date: October 23rd, 2021 5:33 PM Author: French floppy french chef i'm saying you can't have equal suffrage in an institution if the institution literally doesn't exist at all (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947540&forum_id=2#43319888) |
|
Date: October 23rd, 2021 8:41 PM Author: Buck-toothed sound barrier locus If the senate doesn’t exist then all the states would certainly have equal suffrage in the senate. If article 5 also affirmatively protected the right of states to have suffrage in the senate, without “equal” (or any other qualifier) limiting the right to “suffrage,” then I would agree with you.
Please state your LSAT. |
|
Date: October 23rd, 2021 9:36 PM Author: French floppy french chef > If the senate doesn’t exist then all the states would certainly have equal suffrage in the senate.
Your statement contains a straight logical self-contradiction. You can't have equal suffrage, or any form of suffrage, in a non-entity, a non-existent institution, a zero, a nothing. It has to exist in some form, even if it's a hollowed out shell, in order to have equal suffrage in it. This seems like a really basic point to me. "equal suffrage in X" presumes the existence of X. If X doesn't exist, you can't have equal suffrage in X. If you think otherwise, you're just playing games with words without connecting them to reality. |
|
Date: October 24th, 2021 8:37 AM Author: Buck-toothed sound barrier locus If the founders wanted the ensure that all states could not lose their suffrage in the senate, they would have said so. But they didn’t. They only prevented amendment to the extent it affected equal suffrage. We would all have equal suffrage (i.e., no suffrage) in the senate if it did not exist. Please take your purposivism elsewhere you filthy lib. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947540&forum_id=2#43322265) |
|
Date: October 23rd, 2021 3:08 PM Author: Razzmatazz forum Any state that approved the 14th Amendment consented to giving up their equal suffrage in the senate. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947540&forum_id=2#43319284) |
|
Date: October 23rd, 2021 5:33 PM Author: French floppy french chef fake news (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947540&forum_id=2#43319886) |
|
Date: October 22nd, 2021 12:52 PM Author: fragrant abnormal keepsake machete yarmulke *national review writer FURIOUSLY pre-writing a piece on why SD still deserves 0.5 votes in the Senate* (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947540&forum_id=2#43313929) |
|
Date: October 23rd, 2021 5:38 PM Author: Dashing garnet ceo GOP would sue in federal court and win easily (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947540&forum_id=2#43319899) |