John Dean: Palin Does NOT Meet Constitutional Qualifications For Vice Presidents

[Phred42]

He doesn't just play a Constitutional Scholar on the TV screens - he IS a Constitutional Scholar!

John Dean

The Sarah Palin Selection: Why McCain's Inexperienced Running Mate Falls Short of Meeting the Implicit Constitutional Qualifications For Vice Presidents

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20080905.html


FindLaw columnist and former counsel to the president John Dean argues that the Constitution implies that Vice Presidents -- and thus, candidates for that office -- must have qualifications and experience greater than that of Alaska Governor and GOP vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin. Drawing on the text and history of the Constitution and related succession statutes, Dean contends that no Congress would have confirmed Palin had she been nominated by a sitting president to fill a vacancy in the office of Vice President. He contends that from this premise, it follows that Palin also should not have been chosen by John McCain to run for the office this November.

In truth, the Vice President of the United States is important for only one reason: He or she will become President of the United States upon the death, incapacity or resignation of the President. Nine times in our history, vice presidents have succeeded to the presidency: John Tyler (1841), Millard Fillmore (1850), Andrew Johnson (1865), Chester A. Arthur (1881), Theodore Roosevelt (1901), Calvin Coolidge (1923), Harry Truman (1945), Lyndon Johnson (1963), and Gerald Ford (1974). Of course, the vice president also has a significant secondary role: It is he or she, acting with a majority of the Cabinet, who can declare the president incapable of carrying out the duties of the office, and then take charge - until the action is either ratified or rejected by a majority of the Congress. So far in our history, however, this has never occurred.

[Radical Activist]

1. Amazingly poor argument.

He keeps writing about "suggested" and "implied" constitutional requirements but doesn't back that up with specific text in the Constitution. We can point out that she's unqualified without strained, unsupported claims about constitutional requirements. I kept waiting for him to back up his headlines and it never happened.

[MindMatter]

12. Absolutely. This just makes us look like whiners

Hit the woman hard on the issues. Make her own everything she has done.

She is constitutionally qualified for the office. No debate there.

She would be a horrendous choice, and here is why ...

[michreject]

13. Me too

I'll never get that 5 minutes back.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

2. Just silly.

[Hugabear]

3. Sorry, but that's an absolute horseshit argument

For one thing, it's unprovable that "no Congress would have confirmed Palin". You simply cannot take an opinion - no matter how strong it is - and claim that it's a fact.

Even if we assume that no Congress would have ever confirmed her, that doesn't mean jackshit. She does meet the Constitutional qualifications to be President, which really aren't very strict. The Constitution doesn't specify any amount of experience, any level of intelligence, etc. You pretty much just have to be a natural born citizen of the US, and over 35 years of age.

[glitch]

4. As if that would bother the people looking for figureheads.

McCain/Palin even more than Bush/Cheney tell me Republicans only present figureheads for high office, the real power is held elsewhere.

As far as Republicans are concerned, the USA is no longer a Republic and there is no advantage to pretending it is anymore.

[screembloodymurder]

5. My plumber was mayor of a small town.

Actually, it's bigger than Palin's town, but what's a few thousand people among friends. He shares many of Palin's views too. He's a hunter, a global-warming denier, a Bush fan, a racist and a drunk. Fits the Republican ticket to a T.

[Hugabear]

7. Technically, your plumber may be qualified to be President

At least if you go by the minimal requirements laid out in the Constitution.

Sounds like a great rethug candidate.

[grace0418]

11. Except for one thing. If he's a plumber he must have at least one skill. That's one more than

Bush has.

[unblock]

6. those aren't the qualifications for veeps. they're the requirements for bypassing an election

it's also just plain wrong. if mclame were to somehow become president with an vacant vice-presidency, and then appoint palin, of course the senate would confirm her.

there would be much hew and cry and hand-wringing, but in the end, they'd approve here in deference to letting the president appoint his own team in much the same way that they usually don't actually veto presidential picks for the supreme court or the cabinet.

yes, it happens, but usually only if you smoked pot or forgot to pay your nanny tax.

[Phred42]

8. The Freepers found this one

The word is spreading across the Heritage Foundation's basement Boiler room operation?

Dean is a Constitutional Authority - and you're not.

[hootinholler]

9. "can declare the president incapable of carrying out the duties of the office, and then take charge"

:scared:

-Hoot

[tritsofme]

10. I think John Dean jumps the shark with an argument like this.

I can think of plenty of VP selections that may not have passed congress while still getting elected. This really is ridiculous.

[truebrit71]

15. Dan Quayle leaps to mind as one that fits your argument...

...

[crimsonblue]

14. Why is everybody attacking Dean on his arguments?

Dean didnt ever state that she was Constitutionally unqualified, just that it is inferred that she would never pass Congressional muster. This is accurate. Who in their right mind in Congress would approve Palin over Romney, Giuliani, Huckabee (among Republicans)? Dean is using a lawyer mentality in saying this woman is unqualified. Apparently, I'm the only one that has read his books and agrees wholeheartedly with his assessment.