This has been driving me crazy (or rather Eyer8). I heard a news blurb a couple of weeks ago, on NPR I think, detailing that several people were filing suit to stop Cheney from becoming VP. The suit claimed that it was illegal to have the Pres and VP from the same state. Allegedly, Cheney switched his state of legal residence to Wyoming in July from TX to avoid this whole issue.
So here is the question(s):
Has anybody heard of this case? Is it valid? Have there been any rulings made?
Frankly, I think it’s a long shot. The fact is, in these times, for some people (certainly not po’ folk like me, but for others) to have more than one piece of property. Residency requirements vary in each jurisdiction. I’m certain that since Cheany changed his ‘legal’ residence to Montanna (that was it, wasn’t it?) like last June or July, that it was done with this in mind, and that a team of lawyers went over the applicable statutes with seventeen fine tooth combs.
Frankly in the past several months, Mr. Cheany has been “residing” in hotels for the most part, so don’t expect too much from that one. IMHO.
this was also answered in the thread started specifically for all the odd “what if” questions about this election.
AFAIK, Cheney and his dick (or is it Dick Cheney?) was always from Wyoming (he was a representative from there before he became the Defence Sec).
It was Hillarious, who switched states shortly before the election. It was “valid” (she ran and was elected). No rulings.
Mrs. Clinton did the same type of thing by moving to New York to get elected.
The elder Bush did it also. He, of course, lived in the White House and at his “vacation” home in Maine. He voted in Texas because in “lived” in a hotel suite in Houston when he “found” time to be “home”. There was a fair amount of publicity over this and other similar cases. Courts basically rule your “home” is where you intend it to be and that you may be away from “home” a lot [being a student, military, other jobs, etc].
I don’t know of anything that says the president and vice president can’t be from the same state.
The Constitution does prohibit the electors from voting for a president and vice president both of whom are from their own state; at least one has to be from another state. Ergo the Texas electors (all 32 of them) can’t elect Bush and Cheney if they’re both inhabitnats of Texas. (U.S. Const., Amendment XII: “The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves”). But all the other, non-Texas Republican electors are free to vote for Bush and Cheney.
Presumably, if Cheney were legally ruled to be an inhabitant of Texas, the Texas electors would vote for Bush for president and some other, non-Texas resident, for vice-president. Cheney would then lack sufficient electoral votes to become vice-president, and the Senate would pick between Cheney and Lieberman. With the current Republican majority in the Senate, Cheney would probably be selected.
As you stated, Cheney moved to Wyoming months before the election to avoid this whole problem. I don’t know how the plaintiffs expect to prove that he is “really” still an inhabitant of Texas; it sounds like malarkey to me, but I haven’t read their brief.
I wouldn’t hold your breath waiting for the decision about Cheney’s residence to decide the election. Historically, we haven’t gotten all that worked up about residency. I don’t think Cheney would have a hard time proving to a judge that he lives in Wyoming, especially since that state allowed him to vote in the election.