No, the Supreme Court will not be kicking Clinton out of office
Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a case that Secretary Clinton is ineligible to be secretary of state due to a clause in the Constitution that says no member of Congress can be appointed to a government job if the salary for it was increased during that member’s current term (see Article I, ...
Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a case that Secretary Clinton is ineligible to be secretary of state due to a clause in the Constitution that says no member of Congress can be appointed to a government job if the salary for it was increased during that member's current term (see Article I, Section 6, Clause 2), as reported by the Associated Press (AP).
When Clinton was a senator, Congress increased the salary for the secretary of state to $191,300, but to allow her to accept the cabinet post Congress later decreased it to $186,600, the amount it was when she began her second Senate term. The AP article states that similar moves have been made previously to allow members of Congress from both parties to serve in the cabinet.
The case, Rodearmel v. Clinton, 09-797, was brought by Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group, on behalf of State Department employee David Rodearmel who says that working for Clinton violates the oath he took as a Foreign Service officer to "bear true faith and allegiance" to the Constitution.
Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a case that Secretary Clinton is ineligible to be secretary of state due to a clause in the Constitution that says no member of Congress can be appointed to a government job if the salary for it was increased during that member’s current term (see Article I, Section 6, Clause 2), as reported by the Associated Press (AP).
When Clinton was a senator, Congress increased the salary for the secretary of state to $191,300, but to allow her to accept the cabinet post Congress later decreased it to $186,600, the amount it was when she began her second Senate term. The AP article states that similar moves have been made previously to allow members of Congress from both parties to serve in the cabinet.
The case, Rodearmel v. Clinton, 09-797, was brought by Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group, on behalf of State Department employee David Rodearmel who says that working for Clinton violates the oath he took as a Foreign Service officer to "bear true faith and allegiance" to the Constitution.
I’m not a law expert, but it seems that the spirit of Clause 2 wasn’t violated. The salary was increased, but the increase was later rescinded, which prevented Clinton from benefiting from a pay increase she was able to vote on.
(In the photo above, Clinton is sworn in to her secretary-of-state post on Feb. 2, 2009, by Vice President Joe Biden, as husband Bill, daughter Chelsea, and mother Dorothy Rodham look on.)
More from Foreign Policy
Is Cold War Inevitable?
A new biography of George Kennan, the father of containment, raises questions about whether the old Cold War—and the emerging one with China—could have been avoided.
So You Want to Buy an Ambassadorship
The United States is the only Western government that routinely rewards mega-donors with top diplomatic posts.
Can China Pull Off Its Charm Offensive?
Why Beijing’s foreign-policy reset will—or won’t—work out.
Turkey’s Problem Isn’t Sweden. It’s the United States.
Erdogan has focused on Stockholm’s stance toward Kurdish exile groups, but Ankara’s real demand is the end of U.S. support for Kurds in Syria.
Sign up for Morning Brief
Foreign Policy’s flagship daily newsletter with what’s coming up around the world today. Delivered weekdays.
By submitting your email, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use and to receive email correspondence from us. You may opt out at any time.
