Cowardly and shamful, and the attitude of a small percentage of Evangelicals towards Mormons is no different than that of radical Muslims towards Jews.

Note: I am neither Evangelical nor Mormon, tho I’ve spent most of my life in Salt Lake City, and most of my cousins are Mormon.

Second, consider the precedent that “It is clear from the Constitution that the Senate has exclusive control on the seating of their own members” sets: it makes the Senate sovereign to the people in determining admittance (tho notably not expulsion) to its own membership. Under that precedent, the Senate could arguably bar Coleman if he eventually triumphs in MN (and MN agrees), simply because they don’t trust how MN tallied the vote.

The Senate is clearly empowered to do that, if they so choose.

So is the House, which is exactly what they did in 1984 in McCloskey vs. McIntyre.

If the Senate or the House abuse their internal powers of seating members, it’s up to the people to correct that, not the SCOTUS.

The Senate is not bound by stare decisis. Reid should tell the SCOTUS to shove it if they try and interfere in this.

In reality, it is. Mark Kirk, the US Congressman from the 10th District in Illinois, is a very big threat to them. During an interview on one of the two main conservative stations in Chicagoland, WLS, on December 10, he said that he would run if a special election was called. Note that Kirk is definitely a liberal Republican as he featured the endorsement of planned parenthood on his brochures and that of JACPAC on his campaign website.

In his five elections Kirk has run up margins as high as 38%. This year he increased his margin from by 4% (to 10%) despite the fact that his district includes most of northern Cook County (where Obama won by 53%) and southern and eastern Lake County (where Obama won by 13%.) Kirk also managed to do this despite being opposed by a, for this district, relatively strong challenger (Dan Seals) and being targeted by national Democrats as a vulnerable seat. Kirk would minimize gains for the Democrats in the Northern suburbs (which is where his congressional district is) and the city. He is a great fundraiser (over 4.6 million this cycle.) He is a very clean cut guy and has a solid approval rating. Kirk, who was rumored a couple of months ago to be considering a 2010 Gubernatorial bid, definitely strikes fear into the hearts of many Illinois Democrats who want to wait and see if Blago can blow over before hurting them in any elections, especially such an important one.

As for the actual constitutional questions, I first recommend reading the cited opinion of Powell v. McCormack (or at least the syllabus). Second, consider the precedent that “It is clear from the Constitution that the Senate has exclusive control on the seating of their own members” sets: it makes the Senate sovereign to the people in determining admittance (tho notably not expulsion) to its own membership. Under that precedent, the Senate could arguably bar Coleman if he eventually triumphs in MN (and MN agrees), simply because they don’t trust how MN tallied the vote.

I presume most of this sentiment is an outgrowth of the underlying reason to want to bar Blagojevich’s appointment on the basis that Blagojevich is an unapologetic scumbag. Nevertheless, that does not change the general rule that bad cases make bad law, and I think the precedent that would set would very much be bad law. Just let Blagojevich keep digging here, Republicans are sideline winners (save for a Democrat getting the seat, but this is IL, there really isn’t much hope anyway) anyway, plus it’s great “pass the popcorn” moments as I’m sure Moe Lane would agree.

It seems clear to me that the Supreme Court has *zero* jurisdiction over whether or how Senators chose to seat one of their own. It is clear from the Constitution that the Senate has exclusive control on the seating of their own members.

If the SCOTUS actually has the audacity to try and tell the Senate that they have to seat Burris, I hope Reid & co. tell SCOTUS to stick it, that they have no jurisdiction over Senate matters, and that they simply intend to ignore the ruling.

Frankly, the Bush Administration should done something similar in Hamdan.

It’s time for the other two branches of the government to knee-cap this continual out of control overreaching by the Supreme Court.

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.

When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of each State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.

I agree, Repubicans, step away for the stinkbomb. Do not Touch it, run as fast as you can the crowd of Democrats in the room will ruin your clothes when their heads explode.

Also, I don’t really think Obama can do anything. Blago obviously isn’t listening to him. Why would Reid? Reid and Pelosi control the congress and aren’t going to answer to Obama (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1208/16728.html.)

Obama’s only power is based in (1) the overwhelming support from far left organizations which dominate the Democratic Party and (2) public approval. However, the first will quickly weaken, although not completely erode, as he tries to move center to win re-election. These organizations will move towards Reid and Pelosi as they realize Obama is not willing to take the steps they want, while the other pair presses forward with the reforms the radicals want. The latter will fall prey to a weak economy and unmeetable expectations within the first year.

In the end, Reid will have to seat Burris due to racial pressure. The African-American vote was crucial for the Democrats this election cycle (and will be in 2012) and they cannot afford to anger black leaders.

Unless Sec. White can prove Roland Burris is ineligible, unfit to serve or personally involved in the Blagojevich Scandal, White has no legal basis to deny certification.

In other words, Sec. White’s refusal to sign the document on political grounds would only be a symbolic jester, because his signature is not required. As long as Roland Burris’ credentials are in order, Gov. Blagojevich can still take the appointment to the Senate.

Interestingly, the GOP will probably do nothing but make some sort of public statement and keep the whole thing at arm’s length. The Dems are doing a fine job of making themselves look stupid. We don’t have to do a thing except kick back the Barcalounger and watch.

Obama issued the following statement in which he disagreed with the appointment:

“Roland Burris is a good man and a fine public servant, but the Senate Democrats made it clear weeks ago that they cannot accept an appointment made by a governor who is accused of selling this very Senate seat. I agree with their decision, and it is extremely disappointing that Governor Blagojevich has chosen to ignore it. I believe the best resolution would be for the Governor to resign his office and allow a lawful and appropriate process of succession to take place. While Governor Blagojevich is entitled to his day in court, the people of Illinois are entitled to a functioning government and major decisions free of taint and controversy.”

Let’s see how strong Rod’s grip is.