South Texas Law Review Vol.61 No.3

SOUTH TEXAS LAW REVIEW

SOUTH TEXAS COLLEGEOF LAW HOUSTON HOUSTON, TEXAS

SUBSCRIPTION PRICE

The subscription price to South Texas Law Review is $32.50 per annum (plus applicable sales tax). The price for a single symposium issue is $25.00.

CURRENT ISSUES

Single issues in the current volume, including symposium and special issues, may be purchased from the Review by contacting Jacob Hubble at (713) 646-1749.

BACK ISSUES

Complete volumes and single issues prior to the current volume are available exclusively from William S. Hein Co., Inc., 2350 North Forest Road, Getzville, NY 14068, (800) 828-7571.

South Texas Law Review is published four times each year by the students of South Texas College of Law Houston. Four issues of the Review constitute one volume.

Subscriptions to South Texas Law Review are considered to be continuous and absent receipt of notice to the contrary, it is assumed that a renewal of the subscription is desired. Please notify Jacob Hubble of any change of address.

The Review welcomes the submission of unsolicited manuscripts. All submissions should be typed and double spaced with footnotes. Citations should conform with The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation (Columbia Law Review Ass’n et al. eds., 21st ed. 2020) and, where applicable, the Texas Rules of Form (14th ed. 2018).

Except as otherwise noted, South Texas Law Review is pleased to grant permission for copies of articles, notes, and book reviews to be made for classroom use, provided that (1) a proper notice of copyright is affixed to each copy; (2) the author and source are identified; (3) copies are distributed at or below cost; and (4) South Texas Law Review is notified of the use.

All communications should be addressed to:

South Texas Law Review

1303 San Jacinto, Houston, Texas 77002 Telephone: (713) 646-1749 or Facsimile: (713) 646-2948

Copyright 2021, South Texas College of Law Houston

All rights reserved.

SOUTH TEXAS LAW REVIEW

FALL 2021VOL. 61NO. 3

EDITORIAL BOARD

2021–2022

ERIC WILLIAMS Editor in Chief

MOSES MASON Managing Editor

BAKER HOWRY Executive Editor

VIKESH PATEL Development Editor

BRIGETTE DECHANT FARYN FORT SHRUTI MODI HALEY MCCLURE PRESSLEY NICHOLSON CHANAE WILLIAMS LORENA VALLE ELIAS YAZBECK Senior Articles EditorsArticles Editors

ASST. DEAN ELIZABETH A. DENNIS PROF. VAL D. RICKS Faculty AdvisorFaculty Advisor

PROF. SHELBY A.D. MOORE

JACOB HUBBLE Faculty AdvisorScholarly Publications Coordinator

MEMBER, NATIONAL CONFERENCEOF LAW REVIEWS

SOUTH TEXAS LAW REVIEW

FALL 2021VOL. 61NO. 3

Members

GISELA AGUILAR RYLIE GOLDWAIT EMMA PEREZ

JORDAN BARLEY DAVID GRIFFIN COURTLAND PETTIGREW

ALLYSSA BAUMEISTER MACDONALD HIGBEE DEANNA RODGERS

MAI BAYLESS STEPHEN HOLOMBEK KATHERINE ROSENDAHL

HALEY BERNAL MIKHAEL KHAN JOSE SALAS

KIMBERLY BRONSON KENDAHL LEE GRECIA SARDA

AMANDA CAPOZZELLI TAYLOR LEGER MEREDITH SPILLANE

RAYMOND CARRILLO DENA LIPPER ANUTIDA SRILAMSINGHA

TYLER CIAVARRA BOSTON MALLORY KEVIN SZYMCZAK

MARTIN COHICK MIRANDA MANN SETH TOUPS

CAITLIN COLEMAN KAITLYN MCKINNEY ZACH TROELL

MONTANA CORTEZ EDWARD MICHEL RHEA VARGHESE

JUNIE DALICE EMILY MITCHELL TYLER WILLIAMS

MICHAEL DAVIS ALEXANDRIA MONROE CAMERON WILSON

MANDIE DIMARTINO LINDSEY MOORE JOHN LOGAN WILSON

LANCE FELICIEN JOAN MOORES NOLAN WLECZYK

GRACIELA GARCIA MONIQUE NADKARNI ASHLEY WOLLASTON

MAHA GHYAS MARGARET ODUNZE ALEC ZORICH

ROSE PAULER-RUSH

The opinions expressed in the South Texas Law Review are those of the contributors and are not necessarily representative of the views of the editors of the Review or of South Texas College of Law Houston.

SOUTH TEXAS LAW REVIEW

FALL 2021VOL. 61NO. 3

SOUTH TEXAS COLLEGEOF LAW HOUSTON

MICHAEL F. BARRY, President and Dean

CATHERINE GREENE BURNETT, Vice President, Associate Dean for Experiential Learning, Professor of Law, and Director of Pro Bono Honors Program

TED L. FIELD, Vice President, Associate Dean for Faculty, and Professor of Law

MANDI GIBSON, Vice President, Student Services and Support

CHERIE O. TAYLOR, Vice President, Associate Dean for Academics, Director of Institute for International Legal Practice and National Security, and Professor of Law

FACULTY

MICHAEL F. BARRY, B.A., University of Virginia; M.A., University of San Francisco; J.D., Yale Law School; President and Dean, Professor of Law.

JOHN H. BAUMAN, B.A., Pomona College; J.D., Stanford Law School; Professor of Law.

DEBRA BERMAN, B.S., Georgetown University; J.D., American University Washington College of Law, Associate Professor of Clinical Studies and Director of the Frank Evans Center for Conflict Resolution

JOSH BLACKMAN, B.S., The Pennsylvania State University; J.D., George Mason University School of Law; Charles Weigel II Research Professor, and Professor of Law.

V

ANESSA B ROWNE -B ARBOUR , B.A., Carnegie-Mellon University; J.D., Duquesne University School of Law; Professor of Law.

CATHERINE GREENE BURNETT, B.A.,University of Texas; J.D., University of Texas School of Law; Vice President, Associate Dean, and Professor of Law.

ELAINE A. CARLSON, B.S., Southern Illinois University; M.A., McMaster University; J.D., South Texas College of Law Houston; Stanley J. Krist Distinguished Professor of Texas Law; 2008 Distinguished Alumna and Professor of Law.

RICHARD R. CARLSON, B.A., Wake Forest University; J.D., University of Georgia School of Law; Professor of Law.

AMANDA HARMON COOLEY, B.A., University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; J.D., University of North Carolina School of Law; Vinson & Elkins Research Professor, and Professor of Law

GEOFFREY S. CORN,B.A., Hartwick College; J.D., George Washington University Law School; LL.M., The Judge Advocate General’s School, United States Army; Gary A. Kuiper Distinguished Professor of National Security Law, and Professor of Law

DANIEL R. CORREA, B.A., University of California at Los Angeles; J.D., Oklahoma City University School of Law; LL.M. New York University School of Law; Assistant Professor of Law.

ELIZABETH A. DENNIS, B.A., Hollins College; J.D., South Texas College of Law Houston; Assistant Dean, Director of Academic Internships, and Associate Professor of Clinical Studies.

W. DAVID EAST, B.A., Baylor University; J.D., Baylor University School of Law; LL.M., George Washington University Law School; Director of Transactional Practice Center and Professor of Law

MATTHEW J. FESTA,B.A. University of Notre Dame; M.P.A., Murray State University; M.A., Vanderbilt University; J.D., Vanderbilt University Law School; Professor of Law.

TED L. FIELD, B.A., University of Illinois at Chicago; M.A., Northwestern University; J.D., The John Marshall Law School; Vice President, Associate Dean, and Professor of Law.

DEREK FINCHAM,B.A., University of Kansas; J.D., Wake Forest University School of Law; Ph.D., University of Aberdeen School of Law; Professor of Law.

SHARON FINEGAN, B.A., University of Virginia; J.D., American University Washington College of Law; LL.M., Columbia Law School; Professor of Law

ROBERT L. GALLOWAY, B.B.A., Southwestern University; J.D., South Texas College of Law Houston; Vice President of Advocacy, W. James Kronzer Jr. Distinguished Professor of Advocacy, and Professor of Law.

PAMELA E. GEORGE, B.S., University of Texas; M.L.S., University of Texas; J.D., University of Texas School of Law; Professor of Law.

MAXINE D. GOODMAN, B.A., Brandeis University; J.D., University of Texas School of Law; Professor of Law.

HELEN BISHOP JENKINS, B.M.E., Peabody Conservatory of Johns Hopkins Institute; M.M.E., Howard University; J.D., University of Houston Law Center; Executive Vice President Emeritus and Professor of Law

R. RANDALL KELSO, B.A., University of Chicago; J.D., University of Wisconsin Law School; Spurgeon E. Bell Distinguished Professor of Law

CHRISTOPHER S. KULANDER, B.S., Wright State University; J.D., University of Oklahoma College of Law; Ph.D., Texas A&M University; Director of the Harry L. Reed Oil & Gas Law Institute, and Professor of Law.

JOSEPH K. LEAHY,B.A., Swarthmore College; J.D. New York University School of Law; Professor of Law.

KATERINA LEWINBUK, B.A., Minnesota State University; J.D., John Marshall Law School; Professor of Law.

BETTY J. LUKE,B.S., Lamar University; B.S., University of Texas Medical Branch; J.D., South Texas College of Law Houston; LL.M., University of Houston Law Center; Associate Professor of Clinical Studies

BRUCE A. MCGOVERN, B.A., Columbia University; J.D., Fordham University School of Law; LL.M., University of Florida College of Law; Professor of Law.

SHELBY A.D. MOORE, B.A., Towson State University; J.D., University of Baltimore School of Law; LL.M., Harvard Law School; Vice President for Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, and Professor of Law.

JAMES L. MUSSELMAN, A.A., Illinois Central College; B.S., Illinois State University; J.D., Brigham Young University; J. Reuben Clark Law School; Professor of Law.

RYAN H. NELSON, B.S.B.A., University of Florida; J.D., Benjamin N. Cordozo School of Law; LL.M., Harvard Law School; Assistant Professor of Law.

FRANCESCA ORTIZ, B.A., University of Texas; J.D., Harvard Law School; Professor of Law.

PHILLIP E. PAGE, B.S., University of Tennessee; J.D., Memphis State University College of Law; LL.M., New York University School of Law; Professor of Law

JAMES W. PAULSEN, B.F.A., Texas Christian University; J.D., Baylor University School of Law; LL.M., Harvard Law School; Professor of Law

AMANDA J. PETERS,B.A., Texas Tech University; J.D., Texas Tech University School of Law; Godwin Lewis PC Research Professor, and Professor of Law

JEAN FLEMING POWERS, B.A., University of Texas; J.D., University of Houston Law Center; Professor of Law

SCOTT REMPELL,B.A., University of Michigan; J.D., American University, Washington College of Law; Professor of Law.

JEFFREY L. RENSBERGER, B.A., Wabash College; J.D., Indiana University, Bloomington; Charles Weigel II Research Professor, and Professor of Law

CHARLES W. “ROCKY” RHODES,B.B.A., Baylor University; J.D., Baylor University School of Law; Charles Weigel lI Research Professor, and Professor of Law.

VAL D. RICKS, B.A., Brigham Young University; J.D., Brigham Young University, J. Reuben Clark Law School; Professor of Law.

GARY S. ROSIN, B.S., Texas A&M University; J.D., University of Texas School of Law; Professor of Law.

NJERI MATHIS RUTLEDGE, B.A., Spelman College; J.D., Harvard Law School; Professor of Law.

D’ANDRA MILLSAP SHU, B.S., Weber State University; J.D., University of Houston Law Center; Assistant Professor of Law.

MARK R. SIEGEL, B.S., B.A., University of Florida; J.D., Florida State University College of Law; LL.M., Emory University School of Law; Professor of Law.

ANDREW T. SOLOMON, B.A., University of Michigan; J.D., Boston University School of Law; Professor of Law.

MARK E. STEINER, B.A., University of Texas; J.D., University of Houston Law Center; Ph.D., University of Houston; Professor of Law.

DRU STEVENSON,B.A., Wheaton College; J.D., University of Connecticut School of Law; LL.M., Yale Law School; Wayne Fisher Research Professor, and Professor of Law

CHERIE O. TAYLOR, A.B., Harvard University—Radcliffe College; J.D., University of Georgia School of Law; LL.M., Georgetown University Law Center; Vice President, Associate Dean and Professor of Law.

KATHERINE T. VUKADIN, B.A., University of Houston; J.D., The University of Texas School of Law; Professor of Law.

KENNETH WILLIAMS, B.A., University of San Francisco; J.D., University of Virginia School of Law; Professor of Law.

JOHN J. WORLEY, A.B., University of Georgia; J.D., University of Georgia School of Law; M.A., Rice University; Director of Transactional Law Practice Certificate Program and Professor of Law

KEVIN M. YAMAMOTO, B.S., University of California at Davis; J.D., University of San Diego School of Law; LL.M., University of Florida College of Law; Professor of Law.

LISA YARROW, B.A., Texas A&M University; J.D., South Texas College of Law Houston; Assistant Professor of Clinical Studies, Assistant Dean of Academic Success and Professional Achievement.

SOUTH TEXAS COLLEGEOF LAW

HOUSTON

BOARDOF DIRECTORS

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

J. KENNETH JOHNSON ‘86 Chair

GENORA KENDRICK BOYKINS ‘85 Chair-Elect

HON. THERESA W. CHANG ‘96

STEWART W. GAGNON ‘74

CHRIS HANSLIK ‘95

MICHAEL W. MILICH ‘97

RANDALL O. SORRELS ‘87

RUTHIE NELSON WHITE ‘96

MICHAEL S. HAYS ’74, EXOFFICIO

DON D. JORDAN ’69, EXOFFICIO

MEMBERS

DARRYL M. BURMAN ‘83

MICHAEL E. COKINOS

APARNA DAVE ‘02

EPHRAIMDEL POZO ‘97

RANDY R. HOWRY ‘85

NICHOLAS J. LANZA, JR. ‘89

JOSEPH K. LOPEZ ‘78

MARY-OLGA LOVETT ‘93

HON. DEBRA IBARRA MAYFIELD ‘99

AARON REIMER ‘07

ANDREW SOMMERMAN ‘86

JAMES D. THOMPSON III ‘86

CHAIRMEN EMERITUS

MICHAEL S. HAYS ‘74

DON D. JORDAN ‘69

ADVISORY DIRECTORS

LARRY BAILLARGEON ‘74

HON. ROBERT A. ECKELS ‘93

IMOGEN S. PAPADOPOULOS ‘84

GORDON QUAN ‘77

SOUTH TEXAS COLLEGEOF LAW HOUSTON

LAW REVIEW ADVISORY COUNCIL

MEMBERS

N. TERRY ADAMS, JR

HON. JEFF BOHM

JAMES D. SEEGERS

DRU STEVENSON

DULCIE G. WINK

JOHN J. WORLEY

SOUTH TEXAS LAW REVIEW

FALL 2021VOL. 61NO. 3

SOUTH TEXAS COLLEGEOF LAW HOUSTON

ARTICLES

OFFICESAND OFFICERSOFTHE CONSTITUTION PART I: AN INTRODUCTION ..........................

OFFICESAND OFFICERSOFTHE CONSTITUTION PART II: THE FOUR APPROACHES

AN ACTOF RESISTANCE: RECONCEPTUALIZING ANDREA YATES’S KILLINGOF HER CHILDREN

Seth Barrett Tillman 309 & Josh Blackman

Seth Barrett Tillman 321 & Josh Blackman

Shelby A.D. Moore 431

South Texas Law Review

The Foreign Emoluments Clause— From President Washington to President Trump

Office of Profit or Trust under the United States

See Is the Presidential Succession Law Constitutional?

See Gifts, Office, and Corruption

See generally Veil of Ignorance Rules in Constitutional Law

clause-bound

See, e.g.

See, e.g. vacated

Officers of the United States

Id. See The Weird Scenario That Pits President Pelosi Against Citizen Trump in 2020

all of appointed under appointed office under South Texas Law Review

The Foreign Emoluments Clause— From President Washington to President Trump

A. Executive Branch Positions: The President, the Vice President, the Secretary of State, and the Assistant to the Secretary of the Treasury

B. Legislative Branch Positions: Representatives, Senators, the Speaker of the House, the Senate President Pro Tempore, the President of the Senate, the Chief Justice, the Clerk of the House, and the Secretary of the Senate

C. Judicial Branch Positions: the Chief Judge of the Supreme Court, the Associate Judges of the Supreme Court, the Circuit Judges of the Inferior Courts, and the Clerk of the Supreme Court

D. Irregular Positions: Holders of Letters of Marque and Reprisal, Transitional Officers, and Presidential Electors

E. Summary

A. The Offices and Officers of the Constitution under Approach #1

1. Legislative Positions: Legislative Officers and the Members

2. “Offices” and “Officers” in the Executive and Judicial Branches

3. Summary of Approach #1

B. The Amars concluded that Legislative Positions are not “Officers” for purposes of the Succession Clause

C. The Amars acknowledged that some Legislative Positions are “Officers” for purposes of the House and Senate Officers Clauses

D. The Amars found textual support for their position in the text of the Incompatibility Clause

E. Practical Consequences of the Intermediate View

1. Under the Intermediate View, the Presidential Succession Act is unconstitutional

2. Under the Intermediate View, the House and Senate could create offices and then appoint their current and former members to those lucrative post

3. Under the Intermediate View, appointed legislative officers can serve in the Electoral College and choose the President

4. Under the Intermediate View, members of Congress are not subject to the Foreign Emoluments Clause

A. The Offices and Officers of the Constitution under Approach #2

B. Professor Zephyr Teachout adopted the Maximalist View

C. In the Emoluments Clauses litigation, the Plaintiffs and Judge Peter J. Messitte adopted the Maximalist View

D. Practical Consequences of the Maximalist View

E. Approach #2 cannot be reconciled with the plain text of the Religious Test Clause, the Elector Incompatibility Clause, and the Incompatibility Clause

A. “Officers of the United States”

B. “Office . . . under the United States”

C. “Office under the Authority of the United States”

D. “Office or Public Trust under the United States”

1. “Public Trust under the United States”

2. “Office or Public Trust under the United States”

3. Summary

1.

2. Blumenthal

3.

E. The Necessary and Proper Clause

1. “The Government of the United States”

2. “Any Department” of “the Government of the United States”

3. “Officer” of “the Government of the United States” or “Officer” of “Any Department” of “the Government of the United States”

4. “Officers” of “the Government of the United States” will overlap with “public Trust[s] under the United States”

5. Summary

F. “Officer” in the Succession Clause

1. “Office[s] . . . under the United States” and “Officers of the United States” are appointed positions that can succeed to the Presidency

2. “Officers” of “the Government of the United States” are also “Officers” for purposes of the Succession Clause

3. Summary

all

not of appointed under appointed elected officials officers

See, e.g.

Who Can Be President of the United States?: Candidate Hillary Clinton and the Problem of Statutory Qualifications Originalism & The Scope of the Constitution’s Disqualification Clause

Why Professor Lessig’s“Dependence Corruption” Is Not a FoundingEra Concept Interpreting Precise Constitutional Text: The Argument for a “New” Interpretation of the Incompatibility Clause, the Removal & Disqualification Clause, & the Religious Test Clause–A Response to Professor Josh Chafetz’s & the Scope of Professor Teachout’s Anti-Corruption Principle

Why Our Next President May Keep His or Her Senate Seat: A Conjecture on the Constitution’s Incompatibility Clause

The Great Divorce: The Current Understanding of Separation of Powers & the Original Meaning of the Incompatibility Clause

Are Supreme Court Justices “Officers of the United States”?

See also Are Supreme Court Justices “Officers of and under the United States”?: A Proposed Answer for Professor Blackman, see generally Scott Brown Violated the Constitution!!!! (maybe)

See Emoluments Clauses Litigation

See

and the Scope of Professor Teachout’s Anti-Corruption Principle supra Gifts, Offices, and Corruption

The Original Public Meaning of the Foreign Emoluments Clause: A Reply to Professor Zephyr Teachout

Constitutional Purpose and the Anti-Corruption Principle see also Common Interpretation—The Foreign Emoluments Clause: Article I, Section 9, Clause 8

Matters of Debate—The Foreign Emoluments Clause Reached Only Appointed Officers

Matters of Debate—The Foreign Emoluments Clause

Compare Trump’s Foreign Business Ties May Violate the Constitution with Constitutional Restrictions on Foreign Gifts Don’t Apply to Presidents

Blumenthal v. Trump District of Columbia v. Trump

What evidence do Tillman and Blackman have to support this claim

South Texas Law Review

See supra supra

A. Executive Branch Positions: The President, the Vice President, the Secretary of State, and the Assistant to the Secretary of the Treasury

B. Legislative Branch Positions: Representatives, Senators, the Speaker of the House, the Senate President Pro Tempore, the President of the Senate, the Chief Justice, the Clerk of the House, and the Secretary of the Senate

The Officers and Servants of the House, in

O FFICES AND O FFICERS :P ART II both unicameral autonomy regularized

See If the Judicial Confirmation Process is Broken, Can a Statute Fix It?

See id

See Could Justice Thomas Preside over President

C. Judicial Branch Positions: the Chief Judge of the Supreme Court, the Associate Judges of the Supreme Court, the Circuit Judges of the Inferior Courts, and the Clerk of the Supreme Court apex

Chief Judge of the Supreme Court Chief Justice of the United States Teague v. Lane entirely Justices Judge Justice

See infra

See Current Members

See Of Facts & Fantasies: Justice Stevens and the Judge/Justice Story

Id.

Choosing a Chief Justice: Presidential Prerogative or a Job for the Court

Chief Judge

Chief Justice

Associate Judges

William Murray, Lord Mansfield

see also William Murray, 1st earl of Mansfield

Queen’s Bench Division

see also High Court of Justice

Cf. Hail, No: Changing the Chief Justice

See generally inferior id. inferior inferior

D. Irregular Positions: Holders of Letters of Marque and Reprisal, Transitional Officers, and Presidential Electors

inferior Officers Courts of Law

Id. See The Continuation of Politics by Other Means: The Original Understanding of War Powers

See Clio at War: The Misuse of History in the War Powers Debate

See

See generally Letters of Marque and Reprisal: The Constitutional Law and Practice of Privateering

Double Duty Across the Magisterial Branches

A. The Offices and Officers of the Constitution under Approach #1

Id.

Officers Officers

the Senate shall choose the Vice-President see also id.

The Senate Elects a Vice President, February 8, 1837

Id.

See Speaker of the House

See, e.g supra impeachable executive branch officer

B. The Amars concluded that Legislative Positions are not “Officers” for purposes of the Succession Clause

Officer Officer

officers of the United States office under the United States

Speaker of the House of Representatives

C. The Amars acknowledged that some Legislative Positions are “Officers” for purposes of the House and Senate Officers Clauses

Officers Officers Office

America’s Unwritten Constitution

Stanford

Law Review

See Philadelphia Revisited: Amending the Constitution Outside Article V

see also Of Sovereignty and Federalism any office any other

Presidential Succession Act: Hearing Before the Subcomm. on the Const. of the H. Comm. on the Judiciary

Id.

Id. See , A Presidential Succession Nightmare

D. The Amars found textual support for their position in the text of the Incompatibility Clause

Nancy Pelosi Should Not Be President

But cf. Why Strict Cabinet Succession Is Always Bad Policy: A Response to Professor Jack Goldsmith and Ben Miller-Gootnick

See The Great Divorce: The Current Understanding of Separation of Powers and the Original Meaning of the Incompatibility Clause supra

Why the Incompatibility Clause Applies to the Office of the President see also You’ve Got Your Crook, I’ve Got Mine”: Why the Disqualification Clause Doesn’t (Always) Disqualify

The Very Faithless Elector? supra

Id.

See infra

Officer of the United States Office under the United States

Officers of the United States, Office under the United States, Office Officer.

intratextualist

See infra supra

Id.

Id.

hold his Office Office

United States id. Office id.

Id. See Intratextualism

Id.

E. Practical Consequences of the Intermediate View

Bush v. Gore

both

White House scrambles after staffers test positive as new mask mandate takes effect see

also Pence will not self-quarantine and plans to be at the White House Monday

A Timeline of Trump’s Symptoms and Treatments

Trump Was Sicker Than Acknowledged With Covid-19

A Winding Constitutional Path From Trump to Pence to Pompeo

Id. Id.

What if Trump Can’t Run? Many Steps Are Clear, but Some Are Not

Id. Id.

Do Professors Akhil and Vikram Amar Still Think the Presidential Succession Act is Unconstitutional?

Office under the United States

Leaders Who Caught Virus: Boris Johnson, Jair Bolsonaro and Now Trump

Cf. With Boris Johnson in Intensive Care, U.K. Faces a Leadership Quandary

See The Weird Scenario That Pits President Pelosi Against Citizen Trump in 2020 officer officer of the United States

civil Office under the Authority of the United States of the legislature of under concurrently both

Id. supra

Id. see also

executive or judicial

Office of Trust or Profit under the United States

See Samuel Adams Roland Cotton’s“Circumstances and Contrivances,”

see also Samuel Adams supra supra

Office of Profit or Trust under both neither

, The TV Drama “Commander in Chief” and the Constitution: Is the Federal Presidential Succession Statute Unconstitutional?

A. The Offices and Officers of the Constitution under Approach #2

B. Professor Zephyr Teachout adopted the Maximalist View

Id.

Gifts, Offices, and Corruption supra

Id. see also An Officer and a Congressman: The Unconstitutionality of Congressmen in the Armed Forces Reserves

Id.

Gifts, Offices, and Corruption supra

and the Scope of Professor Teachout’s Anti-Corruption Principle supra

A Reply to Professor Hasen

C. In the Emoluments Clauses litigation, the Plaintiffs and Judge Peter J. Messitte adopted the Maximalist View any Office of Profit or Trust under them

is CREW v. Trump

Blumenthal v. Trump District of Columbia and Maryland v. Trump Supreme Court Usage and the Making of an ‘Is,’

CREW v. Trump District of Columbia and Maryland v. Trump Blumenthal v. Trump

CREW v. Trump

CREW v. Trump

O FFICES AND O FFICERS :P ART II

Blumenthal v. Trump

Blumenthal v. Trump

Id. See

Id.

Id. Compare with

Blumenthal

Blumenthal

Blumenthal

Blumenthal

CREW v. Trump District of Columbia and Maryland v. Trump

Blumenthal

Blumenthal

Blumenthal

Blumenthal

Amici Curae

Coda on Dual Service in Congress and as VP: Seth Barrett Tillman Replies

Blumenthal

Blumenthal

Blumenthal v. Trump

District of Columbia and Maryland v. Trump

District of Columbia and Maryland v. Trump

District of Columbia and Maryland v. Trump

Id.

see also

But see vacated

Blumenthal

See District of Columbia

District of Columbia

Id.

Amici Curiae

D.

Practical Consequences of the Maximalist View

See supra

Officer

Id.

Id.

A Reply to Professor Hasen supra

The Anti-Corruption Principle

See supra all civil Officers of the United States Office

E. Approach #2 cannot be reconciled with the plain text of the Religious Test Clause, the Elector Incompatibility Clause, and the Incompatibility Clause

Office or public Trust

Office of Trust or Profit under the United States

Id. supra See infra

See see also

see also A Neo-Federalist View of Article III: Separating the Two Tiers of Federal Jurisdiction

Marbury

See also

Sovereignty and Federalism supra any office any other state

See supra Id.

See List of Speakers of the House

See also, e.g. About the President Pro Tempore

Officers of the U.S.

B.“Office . . . under the United States”

See supra

See infra See generally A Religious Test in America?: The 1809 Motion to Vacate Jacob Henry’s North Carolina State Legislative Seat—A Re-Evaluation of the Primary Sources

See supra

Officers of the U.S. and Office … under the U.S.

C.“Office under the Authority of the United States”

civil Office under the Authority of the United States civil

.

See supra

See supra

See, e.g Justice Breyer made it impossible for Congress to impeach territorial officers for accepting bribes

The PROMESA Board

Members are not “Officers of the United States.” So what are they?

See infra

Officers of the U.S., Office … under the U.S., and Office under the Authority of the U.S.

D. “Office or Public Trust under the United States”

Office or public Trust under the United States regularized

defeasible

See supra

See supra

Defeasible

”Office or Public Trust under the U.S.”

E. The Necessary and Proper Clause

Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof

Necessary & Proper Cl. –“The Gov. of the U.S.”

“The Gov. of the U.S.” and Dept. of the Gov. of the U.S.

the Government of the United States any Department Officer

apex presiding

presides presides

Why President? How The U.S. Named Its Leader, heard on All Things Considered

See The Chair’s Casting Vote: Some Inconsistencies and Problems see also

apex presiding also apex

apex presiding

presiding

apex presiding officers Chiafalo v. Washington Chiafalo state federal

Id. State

see also id. States Chiafalo

See id.

O FFICES AND O FFICERS :P ART II

apex presiding officers

Id.

Necessary & Proper Cl. and “Public Trust under the U.S.”

See supra

See supra

Id.

See supra

See supra

“Officer” in the Succession Clause

”Officer” in the Succession Clause

But cf., e.g. Veil of Ignorance Rules in Constitutional Law clause-bound style their But compare Reclaiming the Constitutional Text from Originalism: The Case of Executive Power with The Foreign Emoluments Clause— Where the Bodies are Buried: “Idiosyncratic” Legal Positions

Journal of Things We Like Lots

O FFICES AND O FFICERS :P ART II

Constitutional Officers: A Very Close Reading

A. Returning the Focus to the Definition of Domestic Abuse

B. General Impact of Psychological Abuse in Cases of Domestic Violence

A. A Brief History

B. Contextualizing Rusty Yates’s Sexual Abuse of Andrea Yates

1. Andrea Yates was Unable to Give Consent.

2. Andrea Yates Knowingly Withheld Consent to Sexual Relations with Rusty.

A. Understanding Maternal Filicide: General Considerations

1. Abused Mothers Abuse Their Children.

2. Conceptualizing the Threat Abused Women Pose to Their Children.

B. Natural Maternal Care

S OUTH T EXAS LAW REVIEW

1. Distinguishing Between Biological Mothers and the Desire to Mother

2. “Good” Mothers Commit Filicide

C. Resistance Theory and its Application to Andrea Yates

1. Denial of Criminal Mother’s Agency is a Denial of the Power of Purposeful Resistance

2. Finding a Unified Definition of Resistance”

3. Reconceptualizing Andrea Yates’s Killings as Acts of Resistance

D. Andrea Yates’s Awakening: A Motive to Kill

“All resistance is a rupture with what is, and every rupture begins, for those engaged in it, through a rupture with oneself.”

Alain Badiou

See Defense: Yates Killed Kids to Save Them

. The Crimes That Changed Us: Andrea Yates

State v. Yates

Beloved . Id.

see generally Blue Mourning: Postpartum Psychosis and the Criminal Insanity Defense, Waking to the Reality of Women Who Kill Their Children

Law & Order Id. supra Woman Not Guilty in Retrial in the Deaths of Her 5 Children

. Id.

. See Mothers Thinking of Murder: Considerations for Prevention

see also supra Id.

. See [N]ot a Story to Pass on”: Constructing Mothers Who Kill

. See Perfect Mother or Artist of Obscenity? Narrative and Myth in a Qualitative Analysis of Press Coverage of the Andrea Yates Murders

Id.

Id.

. See, e.g. , Application of the Insanity Defense to Postpartum DisorderDriven Infanticide in the United States: A Look Toward the Enactment of an Infanticide Act, supra

see id.

see generally Texas Law Made This Mad Woman Sane Mentally Ill Criminal Offenders and the Strict Liability Effect: Is There Hope for a Just Jurisprudence in an Era of Responsibility/Consequences Talk

, The Psychology of Condemnation: Underlying Emotions and Their Symbolic Expression Condemning and Shame

Beyond Accommodation: Reconstructing the Insanity Defense to Provide an Adequate Remedy for Postpartum Psychotic Women, The Conflicted Treatment of Postpartum Psychosis Under Criminal Law

Casey: Mad Moms, Insane Law

. See supra

. See also Drug Warning Too Late for Andrea Yates; Medical Experts Blast FDA Over New Antidepressant Warning

But see Psychiatrists, Doctors Square Off on Drug

. See supra

See supra

. See supra Id.

. Id. . See The Yates Odyssey Psychiatrist Says Mom Delusional

. See The Real of Crime: Psychoanalysis and Infanticide ; see also supra

. See Mad Women and Desperate Girls: Infanticide and Child Murder in Law and Myth supra

. See Mothers Who Kill Their Children and Postpartum Psychosis But see Murderous Madonna: Femininity, Violence, and the Myth of Postpartum Mental Disorder in Cases of Maternal Infanticide and Filicide, supra . Id.

Where is Andrea Yates Now?

. See Psychiatrist Contrast ‘Baby Blues,’ Psychosis

. The Crimes That Changed Us: Andrea Yates

State v. Yates

. See Is There Liability for a “Stinger in the Tongue”?: Psychological Spousal Abuse Defined

see also

Violence Against Women by Their Intimate Partners and Common Mental Disorders

. See infra

A. Returning the Focus to the Definition of Domestic Abuse

Hernandez v. Ashcroft: A Construction of “Extreme Cruelty” Under the Violence Against Women Act and its Potential Impact on Immigration and Domestic Violence Law,

. See OJP Fact Sheet

See, e.g., Victims of Domestic Violence

Domestic Violence

. See OJP Fact Sheet supra

. Id.

. See Battered Woman Syndrome: Selling the Shadow to Support the Substance

. Id.

. See supra

Reconceptualizing Battered Woman Syndrome Evidence: Prosecution Use of Expert Testimony on Battering

. See

B. General Impact of Psychological Abuse in Cases of Domestic Violence

. See supra . Id. . Id. . Id.

Beyond Violence: Recognizing and Addressing All Forms of Domestic Abuse

Psychological Subjugation: The Elusive Form of Abuse supra

Under the Radar: Policing Non-violent Domestic Abuse in the US and UK . See , supra

State v. Durall

Hernandez v. Ashcroft

Rusty Emotionally and Psychologically Abused Andrea Yates

Was Russell Yates Culpable?

Another Side of Multiple Murder: Women Killers in the Domestic Context

C.

Religious Zeal Infused Yates’ Lives, Testimony Shows

see also supra supra

. Id.

. Id.

. See , Who is Andrea Yates? A Short Story About Insanity

Id. supra

Id. . See also supra

. See supra . Id. . Id. . Id. . Id.

. Id. see also supra supra . Id.

. See Preacher Said He Tried to Save Yates Family see also Preacher Who Knew Yates Stands By His Message, supra

. See supra

ee also Religious Zeal Infused Yates’ Lives, Testimony Shows

see also supra supra

. See id.

. Id.

. Id.

. See supra

. See, e.g., , supra

. See supra

some

Mental decline of woman charged with drowning kids documented

. Larry King Live: Encore Presentation: Interview with Rusty Yates; Interview with Karin Kennedy, Brian Kennedy

. Id.

. Id.

. See , FAQ: Why Did You Keep Having Children?,

. See Power, Sex, and Violence: The Case of Marital Rape

. See From the Bedroom to the Courtroom: The Impact of Domestic Violence Law on Marital Rape Victims,

. See Litigation Between Husband and Wife imposed see also Rape of a Wife

A. A Brief History

Commonwealth v. Fogerty . See The Marital Rape Exemption: Evolution to Extinction,

Marital Rape: A Unique Blend of Domestic Violence and Non-Marital Rape Issues,

Weishaupt Commonwealth supra supra supra

, Marital Immunity, Intimate Relationships, and Improper Inferences: A New Law on Sexual Offenses by Intimates supra supra

. Id

Criminalizing Marital Rape in Indonesia . Id supra People v. Liberta

But see supra Id

B.

Contextualizing Rusty Yates’s Sexual Abuse of Andrea Yates

A. Understanding Maternal Filicide: General Considerations

Women Who Kill Their Children: Case Study and Conclusions Concerning the Differences in the Fall from Maternal Grace by Khoua Her and Andrea Yates Mothers Who Kill: Coming to Terms with Modern American Infanticide Images of Women Who Kill Their Infants: The Mad and the Bad

. See Understanding The Connection Between Domestic Violence, Crime, and Poverty: How Welfare Reform May Keep Battered Women From Leaving Abusive Relationships

. See supra . See id. . See id. supra

Id

. Id. . Id.

. See supra

. See Child Abuse in the Context of Domestic Violence: Prevalence, Explanations, and Practice Implications supra

. See supra . Id.

see also Exploring the Intersection Between Violence Against Women and Children from the Perspective of Parents Convicted of Child Homicide, available at

. See supra

. Larry King Live: Interview with David Smith, Rusty Yates

B.

See Key to Yates’ defense disputed Prosecution doctor says he saw no proof of hallucinations,

C. Resistance Theory and its Application to Andrea Yates

. See, e.g. Beyond Social Reproduction: Bringing Resistance Back in Gang Theory, see also The Black Community,” Its Lawbreakers, and a Politics of Identification,

The Political Delinquent: Crime, Deviance, and Resistance in Black America supra

Conceptualizing Resistance, . Id. See also, supra supra

. See Theories of Reproduction and Resistance in the New Sociology of Education: A Critical Analysis, see also id.

D. Andrea Yates’s Awakening: A Motive to Kill

. Id. supra . Id. . Id. supra . See supra

. See id. Yates’ Mom: ‘She was a Wonderful Mother,’

. See supra,

. See Filicide-Suicide: Common Factors in Parents Who Kill Their Children and Themselves,

her own terms