General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRep James Clyburn: " The filibuster is not Law.."/ Texas Democrats at the Capitol (edit to add)
Link to tweet
Link to tweet
LetMyPeopleVote
(144,005 posts)This is merely a rule of the Senate that can be changed by majority vote of the Senators
LakeArenal
(28,729 posts)So Dems could eliminate it while in power in the senate? Of course they could reinstate it someday. But make hay while the sun shines
Budi
(15,325 posts)PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)sheshe2
(83,347 posts)PortTack
(32,606 posts)Law professors: the filibuster is unconstitutional, and Kamala Harris can issue a ruling.
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/op-ed-filibuster-unconstitutional-heres-101532325.html
There is a clear next step in changing the Senate filibuster: Vice President Kamala Harris, as presiding officer of the Senate, can and should declare the current Senate filibuster rule unconstitutional. This would open the door for discussions on a new rule that would respect the minority without giving it an unconstitutional veto.
In 1957, Vice President Richard Nixon, sitting as presiding officer of the Senate, issued two advisory opinions holding that a crucial provision of the Senates filibuster rule requiring two-thirds vote to amend it was unconstitutional. Nixons constitutional determination was reaffirmed by subsequent vice presidents Hubert Humphrey and Nelson Rockefeller. In fact, it was this ruling that allowed both the Democratic-controlled Senate in 2013 and the Republican-controlled Senate in 2017 by a simple majority vote to eliminate filibusters for all executive and judicial nominees.
Harris possesses the same power to rule that the current version of the Senate filibuster, which essentially establishes a 60-vote supermajority rule to enact legislation in the Senate, is unconstitutional because it denies states equal Suffrage in the Senate in violation of Article V of the Constitution.