The Unconstitutionality of State Congressional Term Limits (CRS Report for Congress)
| Release Date |
May 31, 1995 |
| Report Number |
95-646 |
| Report Type |
Report |
| Authors |
Thomas M. Durbin, American Law Division |
| Source Agency |
Congressional Research Service |
Summary:
On May 22, 1995, the U.S. Supreme Court in U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton
(Sup. Ct. Doc. No.
93-1456) in a 5-4 decision held that Arkansas' constitutional amendment, Section 3 of Amendment
73, providing for limitations on congressional terms of office was unconstitutional in that it
established an additional qualification for congressional office in violation of Article I, Sections 2 and
3 setting forth the three basic qualifications of age, citizenship and inhabitancy for Members of
Congress. The Court affirmed the 1994 decision of the Arkansas Supreme Court which had ruled
that Amendment 73 to the Arkansas Constitution limiting the terms of Members of Congress was
unconstitutional in violation of the Qualifications Clauses of Article I because state term limits
imposed an impermissible additional qualification on congressional candidates (See the Arkansas
Supreme case, U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Hill, 316 Ark. 251, 872 S.W. 2d 349, 355-56
(1994)). The
Court also rejected Arkansas' argument that it had the power under the Elections Clause of Article
I, Section 4, Clause 1 to restrict congressional incumbents' access to the ballot by imposing state term
limitations. (See also, e.g., Bryant v. Hill , Sup. Ct Doc. No. 93-1828,
consolidated with U.S. Term
Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, supra ).
