From the New York Post

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says she will ram the unpopular Senate health bill through the House without a vote. Article 1, Sect. 7 of the Constitution says she can’t.

Many House Democrats are reluctant to go on record in support of the Senate bill. Pelosi’s strategy is to “deem” it passed, go straight to a vote on a package of reconciliation “fixes” and then present both the Senate bill and reconciliation package to the president for signing.

In recent years, the US Supreme Court has twice struck down attempts to abbreviate the lawmaking process required by Article 1, Sect 7. Though it’s been used before on less controversial legislation, Pelosi’s tactic won’t survive a constitutional challenge.

* In INS v. Chadha (1982), the high court ruled 7-2 that lawmaking must follow the steps laid out in the Constitution. Foreign student J.R. Chadha (from Kenya, ironically) convinced the Immigration and Naturalization Service to suspend his deportation. The House, acting without the Senate or president, voted to overturn the INS suspension via a “legislative veto” — a device created by prior law to give either house of Congress the means to overturn certain executive decisions.

Chadha challenged the constitutionality of that arrangement and won. The Supreme Court ruled that the House’s action was “legislative” in nature — and declared that lawmaking is “subject to the procedural requirements of Art. 1, Sect. 7 for legislative action: passage by a majority of both houses and presentation to the president.” Anything less is unconstitutional.

Article 1 states: “The votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and nays, and the names of the persons voting for and against the bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively.”

The Chadha ruling applies to the pending health-care vote because the justices did more than strike down the “legislative veto.” They broadly stated that all lawmaking must adhere to the “single, finely wrought and exhaustively considered procedure” laid out by the framers. No short cuts.

Read the rest of the column

This entry was posted on Thursday, March 18th, 2010 at 9:35 am and is filed under Constitutionality. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.