• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Unconstitutional? Who Cares? Just Let the Supreme Court Handle It

    The Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee voted yesterday to send to the Senate floor unconstitutional legislation that would give the District of Columbia a full seat in the House of Representatives

     Like the nearly identical proposal that died in the Senate two years ago, the District of Columbia Voting Rights Act of 2009 would give a House seat to the District and create another seat that would go to Utah.  This seat would belong to Utah only temporarily, however, and would later be awarded to whichever state merits it following the 2010 Census. 

     The committee’s debate appropriately focused on the proposal’s constitutionality (watch a video of the debate here, beginning at 30:30).  Since the Constitution limits representation in the House of Representatives and the Senate to states, and the District of Columbia is not a state, legislation alone cannot give the District a House seat.

     In their remarks, several lawmakers expressed reservations about the constitutionality of the measure.  “The constitutionality of this legislation is a close call,”  Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) said. 

    But Collins nevertheless urged passage.  “I believed then, as I do now, that this question is best resolved by the courts and not by this committee.”  In other words, it’s not our business in Congress to vote against legislation based on constitutional scruples.  It’s the job of the courts, not the Congress, to uphold the Constitution. (Nevermind that pesky oath of office.)

    Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH) went so far as to say that passing the buck to the Supreme Court is a point in favor of the legislation.  He proposed (42:45 in the committee video) that “those who feel it is unconstitutional” should favor the bill’s passage, “allow[ing] it to reach the Supreme Court. They could decide whether it is constitutional or not.”

    Sen.  John McCain (R-AZ) objected to this abdication of Congress’ responsibility, stating (at 46:40) that he has “never operated on the premise [of] let’s pass it and find out whether it’s constitutional or not.  It has not been the way I have shaped my political philosophy in action.”

    Senator McCain is right.  As James Madison explained to the First Congress, “[I]t is incontrovertibly of as much importance to this branch of the Government as to any other, that the Constitution should be preserved entire.”   Each branch of government, then, has an equal power and obligation to interpret and uphold the Constitution.  But it’s a lot easier for those in Congress to push that responsibility onto the courts, so that’s the option they typically select. 

    Instead of kicking the constitutional can down the road, the Senate might consider proposing an amendment to the Constitution.  This would resolve the problem the legislation addresses, without violating the Constitution. 

    Posted in First Principles [slideshow_deploy]

    6 Responses to Unconstitutional? Who Cares? Just Let the Supreme Court Handle It

    1. pete gakos -- hack says:

      growing up at age 17-my father always told me that we in the USA never worry about attack- but the people in this country by themselves whil one day turn to socialism and now it is coming to fruitation of his statement. This was back in the 40s. When are we going to see what is happening- he worked hard and was a good provider for our family. Besides he came here from Greece as a kid and did very well.

    2. Spiritof76, New Hamp says:

      I think voting in favor of the bill by Sens. Collins and Voinovich must be grounds for impeachment. They all took the oath to defend and uphold the US Constitution. Does that mean anything anymore? I am totally lost. I feel like that our country founded on rule of law is lost.

    3. Ozzy6900, CT says:

      Normally, The Legislative Branch writes the Bills which go to the President who signs the Bill into law. The Supreme Court must rule if the law is Constitutional or not. So in a sense, The Legislative Branch could, in fact, defy the Constitution with a Bill, President Obama could sign it and we would have to rely on the Supreme Court to "right the wrong".

      The problem I have with the DC seating rights is the same as first two posters in that the proposal itself is blatantly Unconstitutional! All references to representation as set forth in Article I or the US Constitution refers to "States". The District of Columbia is not a State so how can the Hill even think of proposing a Bill like this?

    4. Jaxsolo, Jacksonville says:

      The comments by Voinovich and Collins are proof positive that conservative Republicans must purge these know- nothing, spineless milquetoasts. For a US Senator to not understand, clearly, that the Congress cannot amend the Constitution by legislation is tantamount to him admitting he or she literally do not understand the Constitution or even how to do the job to which he or she has been elected. It may not rise to the level of impeachment, but it absolutely rises to the level of incompetence and borderline malfeasance.

    5. Pingback: Conservative Compendium » Holder Refuses To Adhere To Constitution

    6. Beeirish1965, CA says:

      Help??? Constitutionality of the 2010 Census? Do we have to fill in everything?

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×