About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

1 1 (April 14, 2020)

handle is hein.crs/govcwzt0001 and id is 1 raw text is: Constitutional Considerations of Remote Voting In Congress April 14, 2020 COVID-19 has had an impact on almost every facet of American life. Congress has not been spared. Largely because the risk of transmission of the disease is highest in concentrated groups, there have been calls to alter the internal operation of the two chambers to introduce social distancing into the legislative process. One high-profile suggestion-intended to limit the risks associated with Members' physical presence on the House or Senate floor and travel back and forth from their districts-is to alter House or Senate rules to allow floor votes to be cast remotely, i.e. with Members being virtually rather than physically present. The prospect of remote voting has given rise to many issues and concerns, ranging from its impact on the deliberative nature of Congress to the technological and security hurdles inherent in its implementation. But there are also constitutional questions. A primary challenge, which both the Supreme Court and the Department of Justice have faced in various contexts, is determining how technological advancements that the Framers could not have foreseen when drafting the Constitution should be treated. Remote voting presents such an unforeseen question, and perhaps one not amenable to a mechanical interpretation in the face of advancing technology. As the House Rules Committec recently put it, remote voting is an untested principle that [i]f challenged ... would be a novel question for a court with no guarantee of a favorable ruling affirming its constitutionality. The Constitution gives the House and Senate discretion to set their own internal rules, including for voting, but not in a way that conflicts with other constitutional principles. Thus, any exercise of the rulemaking power that would allow Members to vote or participate remotely must take into account constitutional requirements, including Article I., §5's requirement that a quorum of a majority of Members is required to trigger each chamber's power to act. Setting Chamber Rules Rather than setting specific rules for the internal operations of each house, the Constitution provides each chamber with wide discretion to determine the Rules of its Proceedings (the Rulemaking power). The discretion embodied in this provision can be seen not only in the fundamentally different procedures by which the House and Senate operate, but also in each chamber's approach to voting on the floor. The House, for example, allows electronic in-person voting, while the Senate does not. Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov LSB10447 CRS Lega Sidebar Prepaed for Membeivs and Cornm ittees o4 Cor~qress ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most