What happened in the case, U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton
(1) AR argued that the Constitution nowhere DENIES this power. Therefore, under the 10th Amendment – the states have this power.
(2) Court says the 10th amendment only allows states to retain powers they had before the Constitution and the power to add additional qualifications was not an original power because there was no electoral system at all.
(3) S. Ct. says even if there were a 10th amendment power, Framers intended the Constitution to be the sole source of qualifications for membership in Congress.
(4) SC – States cannot add additional qualifications. The right to choose reps belongs to the people – not the sates.
(5) Dissent-Constitutional authority comes from consent of people of each individual STATE – not consent of undifferentiated people.
(6) Term limits movement dead unless there is a Constitutional amendment.
We have located some similar legal questions and legal question categories. Check out these challenging questions that askquestions about Constitutional Law and are similar to What happened in the case, U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton. Also, we have included a list of some of our more popular legal question categories. These categories are based on what everyone is asking and answering.