Ryan's Crackdown on Protests May Not Be Constitutional
Source: Political Wire
December 28, 2016 By Taegan Goddard
[link:http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/paul-ryan-livestream-constitution-232994Politico]: Paul Ryans new crackdown against protests on the House floor a direct response to the Democrats gun-control sit-in last summer is prompting questions from experts in both parties about its constitutionality. As part of a House rules package members will vote to approve in early January, House GOP leaders want to empower the sergeant-at-arms to fine lawmakers up to $2,500 for shooting video or taking photos on the chamber floor. But experts say Ryans proposal may run afoul of Article 1 of the Constitution, which says each House may punish its Members for disorderly behavior.
For more than 200 years that has been interpreted to mean any contested sanctions against lawmakers must be approved by the full House with a floor vote, attorneys steeped in congressional legal matters say.
###
Read more: https://politicalwire.com/2016/12/28/ryans-crackdown-protests-may-not-constitutional/
A 'puke doing something unconstitutional!?!?!? Nah, never!
cstanleytech
(26,280 posts)there isnt any real risk to themselves. Maybe if they could be sued and risk losing all of their assets including any retirement benefits from the government that they might have gotten they might actually take a moment before going ahead with this BS.
C Moon
(12,212 posts)liberalmike27
(2,479 posts)Exactly my thought--you realize the Republicans, as much as they pretend to care about it, do not care about the Constitution, unless they figure it can stop a good thing Democrats want to do. If it steals rights, shuts down left wing talk radio, or takes away rights given under the fourth amendment, they're just fine with it. Anything that helps them, it's OK.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)were planning to donate to a fund to pay as many fines as they have the guts to run up. But Ryan lacking the power to follow through would be better.