U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton
Significance, Arkansas Rejects Career Politicians, The Qualifications Clause And Other Prohibitions, Dissent: An Ironic Ruling
U.S. Term Limits, Inc.
Ray Thornton, Winston Bryant, Bobbie Hill
That Amendment 73 to the Arkansas Constitution, which limited the terms of officials elected to office in the legislative branch of the federal government, does not violate the Qualifications Clause or any other part of the U.S. Constitution.
Chief Lawyers for Petitioner
George O. Jernigan, Jr., Richard F. Hatfield, Winston Bryant
Chief Lawyers for Respondents
Doyle L. Webb, Stephen Engstrom, Elizabeth J. Robben, Sherry P. Bartley
Justices for the Court
Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Anthony M. Kennedy, David H. Souter, John Paul Stevens (writing for the Court)
Sandra Day O'Connor, William H. Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas
Date of Decision
22 May 1995
That the "Term Limits Amendment" would erode the structure designed by the framers to form a `more perfect Union"; accordingly, the amendment was judged unconstitutional.
- McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316 (1819).
- Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486 (1969).
- Bullock v. Carter, 405 U.S. 134 (1972).
- FERC v. Mississippi, 456 U.S. 742 (1982).
- Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority, 469 U.S. 528 (1985).
- United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995).
- United States v. Armstrong - Significance, Selective Prosecution Claims, Judicial Vigilance Necessary In Drug Prosecutions, Related Cases, Further Readings
- Timmons v. Twin Cities Area New Party - Significance, Arguing Fusion, Impact
- U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton - Further Readings
- U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton - Significance
- U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton - Arkansas Rejects Career Politicians
- U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton - The Qualifications Clause And Other Prohibitions
- U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton - Dissent: An Ironic Ruling
- U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton - Impact
- Other Free Encyclopedias