DC Statehood: Here’s Why It’s Definitely Illegal and Unconstitutional
Senator John Kennedy talks about the move by House Democrats to start the process of statehood for Washington DC and whether or not the attempt is Constitutional.
Numerous scholars have already cited rulings by the Justice Department under both Democratic and Republican administrations saying that statehood for the District of Columbia would requires a constitutional amendment, not by a vote of the Congressional majority.
"It's not Constitutional," says Kennedy, turning his criticism - and verbal barbs - to New York Democrat Congressman Jerrold Nadler. "The Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee says it is Constitutional, but I've seen the Congressman in action and if you want to hide something from him put it in a law book.
"This was settled in 1790. It's very clear. Now, if they want to amend the Constitution, that's the right approach, but you have to get a two thirds vote to do that. He has some problems...with the 23rd Amendment. They need to read the Constitution and they need to get a real lawyer.
"But we'll block it. As long as the filibuster holds, we'll block it in the Senate. It's going to go through the House like green gas through a goose...and Speaker Pelosi tells her Democratic troops what to do. She gives them instructions and they moo...like a bunch of cattle. But the Senate's different."