The Joke’s On Them…

Well, there’s a slight problem (via Atrios) with the Terri Schiavo “law” that the President signed this morning. The slight problem is this pesky bit from the Constitution :

Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members, and a Majority of each shall constitute a Quorum to do Business; but a smaller Number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the Attendance of absent Members, in such Manner, and under such Penalties as each House may provide.

Which is especially relevant given this news :

In the weekend scramble, U.S. House of Representatives members who had scattered for a two-week Easter recess were called back to Washington and 261 of the House’s 435 members gave the measure well over the two-thirds majority required.

Only three members of the 100-member U.S. senate, however, were present to approve the measure by a voice vote.

No quorum when the law was “passed” means the law isn’t constitutional. Period.

Needless to say, this one shouldn’t be hard case for Federal Judge James Whittemore to decide. Despite all the public handwringing by the self-righteous Republicans who cut their vacations short, the federal courts still don’t have any jurisdiction in this matter. The federal judges should refuse to hear the case further and strike down this dangerous little law before it becomes an unwieldy precedent.

UPDATE : Okay, it looks like the joke might actually be on all of us. Here’s what the senate’s homepage says about quorums :

The Constitution requires a majority of Senators (51) for a quorum. Often, fewer Senators are actually present on the floor, but the senate presumes that a quorum is present unless the contrary is shown by a roll call vote or quorum call.

So, the senate is free to break the rules until someone points out that the rules are being broken??


posted by greg on March 21, 2005 @ 4:13 pm

6 comments

  1. I don’t think it’s as simple as that. I think that in the Senate, it is assumed there is a quorum unless someone objects, at which point Seante does a roll call. If, however, they assume there is a quorum and do a voice vote to approve the measure then I think it’s a strain on the Senate’s rules, but I think it counts. Of course, I’m no constitutional scholar, so feel free to take that with a grain of salt.

    Comment by E-Rock — March 21, 2005 @ 4:32 pm

  2. WQAD InstaPoll
    Should lawmakers intervene in the Terry Schiavo case?
    Thank you for participating in our poll. Here are the results so far.
    Yes 8%
    No 92%

    OK, it’s just a local tv news instant poll, of course I live in a “blue” state.

    Comment by kamachanda — March 21, 2005 @ 4:42 pm

  3. I was thinking the same thing, a quorum call is required to confirm or refute whether there is a quorum. However, that can’t be right, because that would allow three people (the chair and two members, motions need a second) to pass anything they want by voice vote because a quorum call has to be moved by a member present, and if they want to get away with passing things they won’t make such a motion. There must be some exception, I doubt no one’s thought of that in 200 years.

    Comment by SP — March 21, 2005 @ 9:01 pm

  4. That’s the thing. The quorum is assumed until someone challenges it, and who was going to challenge it in this case? If a Senator had really wanted to stop the Senate’s approval, he or she could’ve shown up and asked for a quorum call, right? All of Congress knew what was going on the other night!

    Yeah, theoretically, the Senate could’ve gone on and on doing stuff the other night, but what else were they really going to do? The fix was in.

    Comment by E-Rock — March 21, 2005 @ 9:55 pm

  5. The irony seems to be on all of us. It seems Terri’s heart stopped in 1990 as the result of low potassium brought on by her eating disorder. Eating disorder patients are obsessed with body image and I would expect her to object to her current existence if she could. Her husband is finishing the job she started 15 years ago.

    Comment by Becky — March 22, 2005 @ 6:52 am

  6. The reason why they can do business like this is the same reason they have the filibuster. The Senate is not a body governed by majority rule, but a body ruled by consent. If the Dems really didn’t want this thing to pass they could have sent someone down to request a quorum call, but they didn’t. Reid’s smart enough to know this makes the GOP look bad.

    Comment by RHJ — March 22, 2005 @ 7:35 am

Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.