"Rick" <
[email protected]> wrote in news:v7m2h3$nvdj$
[email protected]:
When Trump was considering Marco Rubio as his running mate, and Harris
is perhaps now considering Gavin Newsome as a potential running mate,
there's been much talk about the 12th Amendment. The 12th Amendment
states:
"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".
In the case of Trump and Rubio, they are indeed both "inhabitants" of
the state of Florida. When George W. Bush and Dick Cheney had a
similar situation back in 2000, they were both then inhabitants of
Texas. But Kamala Harris is actually an "inhabitant" of Washington DC
at present and spends most of her time there. Yes, she is a
registered voter in California and has property there, etc., but as
the sitting vice-president I wonder if she could make the argument
that she is actually an "inhabitant" of DC?
Is there some legal definition of the word that would make Harris an "inhabitant" of California when she may only spend a couple weeks a
year there, if that?
Different states have different rules. In some states you're considered
a resident if you spend at least 183 days in the state over the course of
the year. In other states, such as California, you are considered a
resident if you "intend" to live there long term, no matter where you are
now or how long you have been there.
I suspect that politicians who are located in DC are generally considered
the residents of the states where they came from and intend to return to.
--
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)