The World According to Nick
Politics, News, Photography, and Triathlons... What don't I talk about?
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
<< Monday Music Axioms to Remember >>
Random Question About the Constitution

Article I of the Constitution states that:

No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.

Two questions.  First, does a dual citizenship from a foreign state meet this definition?  Words like "any kind" make this definition seem rather broad.  Second, does this clause prevent someone from holding public office, or does it merely present the means by which someone holding public office can be punished?

By guess is no to the first, and the latter for the second... but I'm not an expert.  Anyone else have opinions?  Does anyone know of case law that clarifies either point?

# Posted at 10:14 AM by Nick  |  Comment Feed Link 2 Comments  |  No Trackbacks

 Add to del.icio.us |  Digg this Post | Filed Under: Misc

Wednesday, July 23, 2008 8:08:52 PM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
I am not a Constitutional scholar, but I am an English teacher and I can parse stuff. I pretty much agree with you.

As it reads to me, it sounds like government officials (maybe both state and federal) cannot take major gifts from foreign governments without the consent of Congress. So Henry Paulsen, for example, can't be made a Knight Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire during his term. It does not read to me as though someone who has been granted something prior to seeking office or appointment to a government job would be barred.

I think it's a way of keeping government officials honest (pause for laughter) but not of limiting who can be a part of government.
Jay Bullock
Wednesday, July 23, 2008 8:12:23 PM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
If parsing the English language was all it took to understand the Constitution as it is applied in law, then half of what government does would not be allowed, and the other half that it tries to forbid would not be forbidden. For instance, "public" in the 5th Amendment takings clause would not have been made to be invisible, and "interstate commerce" would actually only apply to commerce between states.
Nick
Comments are closed.


© Copyright 2009 Nick Schweitzer
Powered By newtelligence dasBlog 1.9.7067.0
Theme Based on Design By maystar