Pauls' Revere
10-26-2019, 07:55 AM
I came across this article, thought it was interesting. Not sure it changes anything though.
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/m/96c21755-215f-314f-89df-53aad8ca8f65/a-dishonest-scrivener.html
At the US constitutional convention of 1787 in Philadelphia, which lasted months, framers fought over every word, clause, and concept that they’d ultimately include in the nation’s foundational legal document. They were careful until the end, but perhaps not careful enough.
Now, in light of the impeachment inquiry into president Donald Trump’s Ukraine dealings, a subtle change in the final version—the work of a dishonest scrivener—could arise in debates over interpretation of Article II, Section 4, the Constitution’s impeachment clause.
Morris ended up making a change to the impeachment clause of the Constitution that Treanor argues is meant to allow for an expansive view of executive impeachment. The version of the clause from the proceedings on the convention referred to the style committee stated: “He shall be removed from his office on impeachment by the House of Representatives, and conviction by the Senate, for treason or bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors against the United States.”
But the version the committee produced in the end and was ratified dropped “against the United States.” It ends with “other high crimes and misdemeanors” instead. The clause reads: “The President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”
Treanor contends that Morris’s final statement about impeachment, reflecting his changed views during that important July debate, suggests that his removal of “against the United States” wasn’t because he thought the phrase was redundant. “Rather, he had a capacious view on when impeachment was appropriate, including circumstances like ‘incapacity’ and being in ‘foreign pay’ and the modification was consistent with that view,” the dean writes.
The people’s version
By the end of the constitutional convention the delegates were exhausted and wanted to get home. They accepted the arrangement that the style committee presented and that’s now the text of the Constitution. Treanor argues that, despite Morris’s treachery, the right thing to do is to view the dishonest scrivener’s version as final because that’s the version “the people” ratified via their states.
But in the few Supreme Court cases that have considered the committee’s changes and their legal implications, justices have continually rejected its work as substantive and looked to the text of the proceedings on the constitutional convention instead. Only justice Clarence Thomas prefers turning to the final ratified text, the one Treanor says Morris doctored to advance an ambiguity that reflects his preference for an expansive view of executive impeachment.
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/m/96c21755-215f-314f-89df-53aad8ca8f65/a-dishonest-scrivener.html
At the US constitutional convention of 1787 in Philadelphia, which lasted months, framers fought over every word, clause, and concept that they’d ultimately include in the nation’s foundational legal document. They were careful until the end, but perhaps not careful enough.
Now, in light of the impeachment inquiry into president Donald Trump’s Ukraine dealings, a subtle change in the final version—the work of a dishonest scrivener—could arise in debates over interpretation of Article II, Section 4, the Constitution’s impeachment clause.
Morris ended up making a change to the impeachment clause of the Constitution that Treanor argues is meant to allow for an expansive view of executive impeachment. The version of the clause from the proceedings on the convention referred to the style committee stated: “He shall be removed from his office on impeachment by the House of Representatives, and conviction by the Senate, for treason or bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors against the United States.”
But the version the committee produced in the end and was ratified dropped “against the United States.” It ends with “other high crimes and misdemeanors” instead. The clause reads: “The President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”
Treanor contends that Morris’s final statement about impeachment, reflecting his changed views during that important July debate, suggests that his removal of “against the United States” wasn’t because he thought the phrase was redundant. “Rather, he had a capacious view on when impeachment was appropriate, including circumstances like ‘incapacity’ and being in ‘foreign pay’ and the modification was consistent with that view,” the dean writes.
The people’s version
By the end of the constitutional convention the delegates were exhausted and wanted to get home. They accepted the arrangement that the style committee presented and that’s now the text of the Constitution. Treanor argues that, despite Morris’s treachery, the right thing to do is to view the dishonest scrivener’s version as final because that’s the version “the people” ratified via their states.
But in the few Supreme Court cases that have considered the committee’s changes and their legal implications, justices have continually rejected its work as substantive and looked to the text of the proceedings on the constitutional convention instead. Only justice Clarence Thomas prefers turning to the final ratified text, the one Treanor says Morris doctored to advance an ambiguity that reflects his preference for an expansive view of executive impeachment.