Here's an interesting legal battle that I hope reaches the Supreme Court.

in proxy •  6 months ago 

image.png

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4492212-federal-judge-rules-proxy-votes-cant-count-toward-house-quorum

For a couple of years during Covid, the Democratic majority in the House allowed proxy votes - votes cast by members present on behalf of absent members - to count towards a quorum for doing business.

Here's the Constitutional issue. The Constitution explicitly authorizes each chamber to determine its own rules of procedure. But it also explicitly requires a majority for conducting business.

So can the House devise a rule that manipulates the meaning of the word "majority"?

They clearly had a majority of members' votes available, but apparently at times only a minority of members' bodies present.

Is all the legislation that was passed that way illegitimate, having not been passed in a constitutionally allowable manner?

Of course most of the hoopla in this case is about is about the evil of a judge striking down a desirable law. Americans, on the whole, don't care at all about constitutional requirements.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!