Will they grant their consent?
Published Wed, Mar 4 2009 2:05 PM
Article I, section 9 of the Constitution ends with this paragraph…
No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.
Which leads me to ask… will the Democratic Party controlled Congress grant their Consent to this?
WASHINGTON (AP) — British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has told Congress that Sen. Edward M. Kennedy has been awarded honorary knighthood.
…
Brown told the senator on Tuesday night that Queen Elizabeth II had made him a member of British nobility. In his speech, Brown referred to the senator as "Sir Edward Kennedy" and called him a "great friend."
How about that? The knight from Chappaquiddick.
Trackback URI for this post: http://perrinelson.com/track.aspx?postid=1321
Permalink URI for this post: http://perrinelson.com/2009/3/4/1321.aspx
Subscribe to this entry's
comment feed. (Atom)
T F Stern responded with:
 | I'm not sure if this qualifies, at least as per your reference to the Constitution; however I've always thought of Sen. Kennedy as a......
Royal Pain in the Butt!
BTW, Your comment to my last article regarding communism was welcome. Drop by as often as you like. |
ablur responded with:
 | Now that they claimed him they have to keep him.
Take him away!
Please, Please, Please. I am begging. |
snaggletoothie responded with:
 | I wouldn't make a big thing out of this until we see how Big Ted reacts to it. I would even recommend extreme caution since Ted might be near checking out. Don't knights have a harder time getting into heaven since more is expected of them? |
Perri Nelson responded with: A big deal?
 | I don't think it's worth making a big deal of it either actually. There are a few Senators and Representatives that have been granted titles of Nobility. The question isn't even whether it is Constitutionally permissible, although a lot of people think that it isn't. Congress can give their consent quite easily, and Senator Kennedy would be Constitutionally enabled to accept the title. I can't really imagine a Congress controlled by his own party to withhold that consent. |
David responded with:
 | *heh* @TF "royal pain in the butt" indeed...
I'm not sure such temporary knighthoods (for the life of the honoree only--no patent of nobility) require a coat of arms, but might one suggest a Drowned Chick on a Chappaquiddick? (with apologies to the shade of Mary Jo for the "chick"--it just had the ch-ch thing going for it.) |
Comments to this entry are closed.