Related Citations

  • Mark R. Brown, Ballot Fees As Impermissible Qualifications for Federal Office, 54 Am. U. L. Rev. 1283 (2005).

    Arguing that ballot fees are foreclosed by the original understanding of the House and Senate Qualifications Clauses.

  • Polly J. Price, Term Limits on Original Intent? An Essay on Legal Debate and Historical Understanding, 82 Va. L. Rev. 493 (1996).

    Arguing that where the Constitutional text and intent of the Framers is unclear, the historical practice of state enactment of additional qualifications from the earliest Congresses should be persuasive.

  • Daniel Hays Lowenstein, Are Congressional Term Limits Constitutional?, 18 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y 1 (1995).

    Arguing that the Framers did not intend for the states to be permitted to add additional qualifications.

  • John O. McGinnis, Original Thomas, Conventional Souter, 74 Pol’y Rev. 24 (1995).

    Discussing Justice Thomas’ originalist analysis of the Qualifications Clause and residual power in the sovereign people in U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton.

  • Ronald D. Rotunda, Rethinking Term Limits for Federal Legislators in Light of the Structure of the Constitution, 73 Or. L. Rev. 561 (1994).

    Arguing that, in part because other limitations on the powers of States are expressed explicitly and not by negative implication, the representative qualifications clause does not “preclude additional, reasonable qualifications that are not otherwise unconstitutional.”

  • Robert C. DeCarli, Note, The Constitutionality of State-Enacted Term Limits Under the Qualifications Clauses, 71 Tex. L. Rev. 865 (1993).

    Noting uncertainty as to which body, if any, may enact term limits.

  • Stephen J. Safranek, Term Limitation: Do the Winds of Change Blow Unconstitutional?, 26 Creighton L. Rev. 321, 385 (1993).

    Arguing that the text and the history of the Constitution do not cure ambiguity with regard to whether the Clause’s enumerated qualifications are exclusive.

  • Troy A. Eid & Jim Koble, The New Anti-Federalism: The Constitutionality of State-Imposed Limits on Congressional Terms of Office, 69 Denv. L. Rev. 1 (1992).

    Arguing that the original meaning of this clause prohibits the imposition of term limits for members of Congress either by Congress or by states.

  • Joshua Levy, Note, Can They Throw the Bums Out? The Constitutionality of State-Imposed Congressional Term Limits, 80 Geo. L.J. 1913 (1992).

    Arguing that the Qualifications Clause’s requirements were meant to be exclusive.

  • Neil Gorsuch & Michael Guzman, Will the Gentlemen Please Yield? A Defense of the Constitutionality of State-Imposed Term Limitations, 20 Hofstra L. Rev. 341, 364 (1991).

    Arguing that exclusion of term limits from the Constitution is insufficient to establish that the Framers meant to prohibit them, and that term limits are consistent with the Framers’ fear of an “aristocratic legislature.”

  • Roderick M. Hills, Jr., A Defense of State Constitutional Limits on Federal Congressional Terms, 53 U. Pitt. L. Rev. 97 (1991).

    Arguing that “nothing in the history or text of the U.S. Constitution forbids the people of the several states from adding qualifications for federal legislators through their state constitutions.”