Article VI of the US Constitution includes this passage:
But the North Dakota Constitution does not require that the Governor and other executive officers take such an oath. John Rolczynski, 82, of Grand Forks, spotted this problem sixteen years ago. Since that time, he's argued that North Dakota's 1889 admission into the union is invalid. It remains a territory, not a state:
Link -via The Adventures of Roberta X | Photo: USGS.gov
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution [...]
But the North Dakota Constitution does not require that the Governor and other executive officers take such an oath. John Rolczynski, 82, of Grand Forks, spotted this problem sixteen years ago. Since that time, he's argued that North Dakota's 1889 admission into the union is invalid. It remains a territory, not a state:
Finally, somebody listened. State Senator Tim Mathern introduced a bill fixing the mistake that will be put to voters this spring. The happy historian, now confined to a nursing home with Parkinson's disease, told the local news team Valley News Live that he was "glad that I was able to see this thing corrected."
Link -via The Adventures of Roberta X | Photo: USGS.gov
Newest 5 Comments
Hope they do it soon because if it's only a territory than Canada may try and take it back
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
I guess Cluck with legal positivism anyone can supersede an entities laws with their own... But if North Dakota was never a state, then how does it fall under the jurisdiction without legal positivism... Moreover if it is legal positivism which would allow the US constitution to supersede the state, then how is that morally applicable?
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
This just sounds like another one of those silly items from somebody that doesn't know their US history or Constitutional law. The US Constitution superseeds the State Constitutions. Not only has this battle been fought in courts but it has also been fought with bullets (US Civil War).
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
This probably isn't a big deal. If the ND Constitution expressly stated that its executive officers were forbidden from swearing allegiance to any entity other than the state of North Dakota, then it might be an issue. It's a fine thing to clarify, but I don't think it's quite as big an issue as this gentleman thought.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
This spring? Hasn't this spring already been and gone? It's summer already in the northern hemisphere.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)