Wow. The following passage from the Congressional Research Service is simply stunning, in light of today's disclosure that Senator Daschle signed a document stating Washington, DC is his "principal place of residence":
The existing constitutional qualifications do require one to be an “inhabitant” of the State from which chosen “when elected.”
[...]
Congressional precedents, as well as the provision’s enactment history, indicate that “inhabitancy” is not to be interpreted in an overly strict or legalistic sense, but rather was meant to assure a real connection to the State from which elected. The development of the concept of “inhabitancy” in House qualifications cases indicates that the term appears to be somewhat akin to the legal concept of “domicile,” encompassing not only actions taken which evidence the establishment of a principal “home” in a State, but also recognizing a person’s intent. Physical presence in the State at the time of election is, of course, a significant factor for consideration, but is not necessarily the determining factor.
It would seem that, by signing a document stating Washington DC is his "principal place of residence" Daschle has taken actions which evidence the establishment of a principal home in Washington, DC. Also, Daschle signing such a document indicates his intent to make Washington, DC his principal place of residence.
(CRS document via Power Line.)
Recent Comments