• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Won't this Bill (HR1) be immediately challenged in the Courts as Unconstitutional if it gets rammed through Congress with an end to the Fillibuster?

There are no federal elections. All elections are held by the States.

There are elections held for Senators and Representatives by the states. Ironically, there is also a clause in the constitution which gives congress the power to regulate these elections.
 
And all elections are subject to federal regulations if congress chooses. This isn’t an opinion, this is a fact.
Read the Federalist Papers. The Founders never envisioned the federal government in a election tyrant position like you're hoping for. Democrats will lie, cheat, steal, support a pandemic and any other means necessary to foist their totalitarian dreams upon the entire country.
 
There are elections held for Senators and Representatives by the states. Ironically, there is also a clause in the constitution which gives congress the power to regulate these elections.
Yes, to make sure they happen; not to dominate them with partisan hackery.
 
Yes, to make sure they happen; not to dominate them with partisan hackery.

LOL... A plain reading does not contain any such restrictions... In fact, it's states it is up to congress... Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations
 
Read the Federalist Papers. The Founders never envisioned the federal government in a election tyrant position like you're hoping for. Democrats will lie, cheat, steal, support a pandemic and any other means necessary to foist their totalitarian dreams upon the entire country.
Then they should not have written that into the constitution!

Totalitarian dreams? Bullshit!
 
And all elections are subject to federal regulations if congress chooses. This isn’t an opinion, this is a fact.
Incorrect. The US Constitution only gives Congress the authority to regulate US House and US Senate elections. Congress has no authority over any other elected position. Which is why HR 1/SR 1 failed and could never become law, it far exceeded the power the US Constitution grants Congress.
 
Incorrect. The US Constitution only gives Congress the authority to regulate US House and US Senate elections. Congress has no authority over any other elected position. Which is why HR 1/SR 1 failed and could never become law, it far exceeded the power the US Constitution grants Congress.
In your opinion, which is wrong. The confederacy lost.
 
There are elections held for Senators and Representatives by the states. Ironically, there is also a clause in the constitution which gives congress the power to regulate these elections.
Those very specific positions may be regulated by Congress, but that does not give Congress the authority to regulate EVERY elected position. Congress' authority with regard to elections is limited to only US House and US Senate positions, and nothing else. HR 1/SR 1 attempted to far exceed Congress' constitutional authority. Had the unconstitutional bill passed Congress it would never have passed the Supreme Court.
 
Those very specific positions may be regulated by Congress, but that does not give Congress the authority to regulate EVERY elected position. Congress' authority with regard to elections is limited to only US House and US Senate positions, and nothing else. HR 1/SR 1 attempted to far exceed Congress' constitutional authority. Had the unconstitutional bill passed Congress it would never have passed the Supreme Court.
I think it would’ve passed the Supreme Court. A very basic reading of the constitution and history shows that the Congress can regulate elections within the states.
 
Those very specific positions may be regulated by Congress, but that does not give Congress the authority to regulate EVERY elected position. Congress' authority with regard to elections is limited to only US House and US Senate positions, and nothing else. HR 1/SR 1 attempted to far exceed Congress' constitutional authority. Had the unconstitutional bill passed Congress it would never have passed the Supreme Court.


Really? Have you actually read the bill?
 
I think it would’ve passed the Supreme Court. A very basic reading of the constitution and history shows that the Congress can regulate elections within the states.
If that is your "very basic reading" of the US Constitution then I would suggest you have a serious reading comprehension problem.

What part of Article I, Section 4, Clause 1 of the US Constitution gives Congress the authority to regulate State elected positions?

"The times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing Senators."

You obviously never read HR 1. Congress does not have the constitutional authority to establish State holidays, or regulate how Governors are elected, or how State judges are retained.

While I'm not surprised that the blatantly unconstitutional HR 1 passed the House, I fully expected it would die in the Senate. The Senate is far more rational than the insane fanatical leftist Nancy "We have to pass the bill to find out what's in it" Pelosi.
 
Really? Have you actually read the bill?
I have actually. One of the things HR 1 attempts to establish illegally is a State holiday. Show me where the US Constitution grants Congress this authority. It clearly doesn't. That alone makes the bill unconstitutional, and there are literally hundreds of similarly illegal examples within this unconstitutional bill.
 
I have actually. One of the things HR 1 attempts to establish illegally is a State holiday. Show me where the US Constitution grants Congress this authority. It clearly doesn't. That alone makes the bill unconstitutional, and there are literally hundreds of similarly illegal examples within this unconstitutional bill.


This section where the create a FEDERAL holiday?

SEC. 1909. ELECTION DAY AS LEGAL PUBLIC HOLIDAY.
(a) In General.—Section 6103(a) of title 5, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the item relating to Columbus Day the following:
“ Election Day, the Tuesday next after the first Monday in November of every even-numbered year.”.
(b) Effective Date.—The amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply with respect to the regularly scheduled general elections for Federal office held in November 2022 or any succeeding year.


Congress can not establish federal holidays? These are all unconstitutional?


(a)
The following are legal public holidays:
New Year’s Day, January 1.
Birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr., the third Monday in January.
Washington’s Birthday, the third Monday in February.
Memorial Day, the last Monday in May.
Independence Day, July 4.
Labor Day, the first Monday in September.
Columbus Day, the second Monday in October.
Veterans Day, November 11.
Thanksgiving Day, the fourth Thursday in November.
Christmas Day, December 25.
 
This section where the create a FEDERAL holiday?

SEC. 1909. ELECTION DAY AS LEGAL PUBLIC HOLIDAY.
(a) In General.—Section 6103(a) of title 5, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the item relating to Columbus Day the following:
“ Election Day, the Tuesday next after the first Monday in November of every even-numbered year.”.
(b) Effective Date.—The amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply with respect to the regularly scheduled general elections for Federal office held in November 2022 or any succeeding year.


Congress can not establish federal holidays? These are all unconstitutional?


(a)
The following are legal public holidays:
New Year’s Day, January 1.
Birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr., the third Monday in January.
Washington’s Birthday, the third Monday in February.
Memorial Day, the last Monday in May.
Independence Day, July 4.
Labor Day, the first Monday in September.
Columbus Day, the second Monday in October.
Veterans Day, November 11.
Thanksgiving Day, the fourth Thursday in November.
Christmas Day, December 25.
States control elections, not the federal government. The bill attempts to illegally force States to establish a holiday. States are under no obligation to recognize any federal holiday. As Arizona demonstrated by refusing to acknowledge Martin Luther King Jr. Day as a holiday until 1992.

Once again, Congress' constitutional authority with regard to elections is limited to only the elections of US House Representatives and US Senators, and nothing else. All other elected positions, and the time and manner in which they are elected, are determined by the States exclusively.
 
States control elections, not the federal government. The bill attempts to illegally force States to establish a holiday. States are under no obligation to recognize any federal holiday. As Arizona demonstrated by refusing to acknowledge Martin Luther King Jr. Day as a holiday until 1992.

Once again, Congress' constitutional authority with regard to elections is limited to only the elections of US House Representatives and US Senators, and nothing else. All other elected positions, and the time and manner in which they are elected, are determined by the States exclusively.

No state is being forced to establish a holiday. Congress is establishing a FEDERAL holiday just like the others listed above... States could choose to not honor the holiday and answer to THEIR voters...

Why do you hate Christmas? :)
 
No state is being forced to establish a holiday. Congress is establishing a FEDERAL holiday just like the others listed above... States could choose to not honor the holiday and answer to THEIR voters...

Why do you hate Christmas? :)
I don't hate any holiday. It is just being located so far north that makes Winter Solstice much more meaningful to me than Christmas. So I celebrate the returning sunlight on Winter Solstice, and mourn its departure on Summer Solstice.
 
I don't hate any holiday. It is just being located so far north that makes Winter Solstice much more meaningful to me than Christmas. So I celebrate the returning sunlight on Winter Solstice, and mourn its departure on Summer Solstice.

Christmas is more fun in Australia.
 
The Constitution expressly provides the States with the authority to enact its own Election Laws.
Not quite...

Art. 1, Sect. 4, Cl. 1:

The times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing Senators.

From HR-1:

SEC. 3. FINDINGS OF GENERAL CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY.
Congress finds that the Constitution of the United States grants explicit and broad authority to protect the right to vote, to regulate elections for Federal office, to prevent and remedy discrimination in voting, and to defend the Nation’s democratic process. Congress enacts the “For the People Act of 2021” pursuant to this broad authority, including but not limited to the following:

(1) Congress finds that it has broad authority to regulate the time, place, and manner of congressional elections under the Elections Clause of the Constitution, article I, section 4, clause 1. The Supreme Court has affirmed that the “substantive scope” of the Elections Clause is “broad”; that “Times, Places, and Manner” are “comprehensive words which embrace authority to provide for a complete code for congressional elections”; and “[t]he power of Congress over the Times, Places and Manner of congressional elections is paramount, and may be exercised at any time, and to any extent which it deems expedient; and so far as it is exercised, and no farther, the regulations effected supersede those of the State which are inconsistent therewith”. Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, 570 U.S. 1, 8–9 (2013) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). Indeed, “Congress has plenary and paramount jurisdiction over the whole subject” of congressional elections, Ex parte Siebold, 100 U.S. (10 Otto) 371, 388 (1879), and this power “may be exercised as and when Congress sees fit”, and “so far as it extends and conflicts with the regulations of the State, necessarily supersedes them”. Id. At 384. Among other things, Congress finds that the Elections Clause was intended to “vindicate the people’s right to equality of representation in the House”. Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 U.S. 1, 16 (1964), and to address partisan gerrymandering, Rucho v. Common Cause, 588 U.S. ____, 32–33 (2019).
(2) Congress also finds that it has both the authority and responsibility, as the legislative body for the United States, to fulfill the promise of article IV, section 4, of the Constitution, which states: “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government[.]”. Congress finds that its authority and responsibility to enforce the Guarantee Clause is particularly strong given that Federal courts have not enforced this clause because they understood that its enforcement is committed to Congress by the Constitution.
(3) (A) Congress also finds that it has broad authority pursuant to section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment to legislate to enforce the provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment, including its protections of the right to vote and the democratic process.
 
Yes and no, but on the off chance HR1 goes through as is it will face immediate challenge on several grounds.

Technically Article 1, Section 4, Clause 1 says the below...

"The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators."

Over the years things have been challenged, others not so much, but HR1 is pretty much a guarantee of challenge given the current political climate.
a challenge is one thing...winning that challenge is quite another.
 
The Constitution expressly provides the States with the authority to enact its own Election Laws.


Article I, sec 4
The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and
Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof;
but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except
as to the Place of Choosing Senators.
 
Back
Top Bottom