• @AbidanYre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      That’s true and it’s been a long time since I read the Constitution too closely. States already have signature requirements for getting on the ballot anyway though. But the supreme Court saying these requirements for this office are ok but these other requirements for this other office aren’t is going to get real ugly real fast

      • @NegativeInf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        35 months ago

        After looking more closely at precedent and the constitutional outlining, it looks like the list of qualifications for Congress et al are considered exhaustive and require a constitutional amendment to add any further restrictions. Take a look at the decision in U. S. Term Limits Inc V Thornton, which came to the conclusion that states cannot impose qualifications on federal congressional candidates and that a states people’s have the right to deny them at election time if they so choose. So I concede. It’s a good idea, but the system makes it difficult to implement. Unless another FDR style tragedy happens in office and then some big national tragedy happens, I really don’t see a way to get this passed.

        But for state government, the term limits could be passed. Idk how beneficial that really is, but 🤷‍♂️