1、Congressional Research Service The Library of CongressCRS Report for CongressReceived through the CRS WebOrder Code 95-646 AUpdated May 31, 1995The Unconstitutionality of StateCongressional Term Limits: An Overview ofU.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton (Sup. Ct.Doc. No. 93-1456)Thomas M. DurbinLegisl
2、ative AttorneyAmerican Law DivisionSummaryOn 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 constitutionalamendment, Section 3 of Amendment 73, providing for limitations on congressionalterms of office was un
3、constitutional in that it established an additional qualification forcongressional office in violation of Article I, Sections 2 and 3 setting forth the three basicqualifications of age, citizenship and inhabitancy for Members of Congress. The Courtaffirmed the 1994 decision of the Arkansas Supreme C
4、ourt which had ruled thatAmendment 73 to the Arkansas Constitution limiting the terms of Members of Congresswas unconstitutional in violation of the Qualifications Clauses of Article I because stateterm limits imposed an impermissible additional qualification on congressional candidates(See the Arka
升级VIP 