Recent Comments

Tim Follert wrote:
Judiciary Committee OKs Adding Race
to Deliberations on Criminal Justice Laws
: “A crime is a crime no matter t…”
Doug wrote:
Judiciary Committee OKs Adding Race
to Deliberations on Criminal Justice Laws
: “I'm not an expert but I it mea…”
jackie wrote:
Judiciary Committee OKs Adding Race
to Deliberations on Criminal Justice Laws
: “what the heck does this mean? …”
City Hall Watch wrote:
Local Officials to Lawmakers: Don't Cut State Aid
& Give Us Choices
: “When New Haven went through re…”

Categories

  • CT Elections 2006
    • Closure on 2006 Democratic Primary
    • Daily Kos Poll Finds Many in CT Would Change Vote
    • Edited: Waxing Nostalgic
  • Cartoons
    • Rowland Gives Blago Some Advice
    • Rell's Deposit
    • The Fate of Newspapers
  • Corporate Watch
    • Big Oil Drank Your Stimulus Check
    • Blumenthal Tells Internet Company to Stop Snooping
    • Public's Right-to-Know Prevails
  • Courts
    • Judiciary Committee OKs Adding Race
      to Deliberations on Criminal Justice Laws
    • Terror Case Convict Appeals To Judge
    • Atlantic Wire Pleads Guilty To Polluting Branford River
  • Education
    • Lobbying Season Starts Early At Capitol
    • UConn Hires Alternative Energy Experts
    • Cosby's message: Responsible parenting
      wrapped in hope and empowerment
  • Election 2008
    • Connecticut Dems Vent Against Lieberman
    • No Censure, Just A Letter Of Disapproval
    • Dems Expected to Scold Lieberman Today
  • Environment
    • Hartford Landfill Closes
    • Is That Toy Safe?
    • Hartford Marathon Goes Orange and Green
  • General News
    • Free Cookies, Milk and Stickers
    • 35 Cents An Hour = Cleaner Dishes
    • Memories From 2008: A Year In Review
  • Health Care
    • Quizzed on Health Care
    • State Officials Insist Husky Network Is Adequate
    • All They Want For Christmas Is Health Care
  • Iraq at Home
    • West Hartford Movie Night
    • Five Years of War
    • Hartford Passes Anti-War Resolution...5 Years Too Late?
  • Labor
    • All They Want For Christmas Is Health Care
    • Jobless Numbers Are Up And The Phone Keeps Ringing
    • Union Members Honor State Veterans
  • Legal
    • Terror Case Convict Appeals To Judge
    • Lawmaker Requests Inmate Information
    • Blumenthal May Stop Suing
  • Local Politics
    • WPCA Urged To Tackle Marshal Fees
    • Who Has The Power To Appoint?
    • Marshals' Sweetheart Deals Targeted
  • Media Matters
    • Two Dailies Saved
    • Governing Magazine: Connecticut's Capitol Coverage
    • WTIC Layoffs Have One Sponsor
      Questioning His Support
  • News Links
    • State Government Home Page
  • Opinion
    • CTNewsJunkie wants your opinions
    • Curious Delivery Made To Press Room
    • Op-Ed: Speaking Out Against A Constitutional Convention
  • State Capitol
    • Speaker Amann Hands Over The Gavel
    • Judiciary Committee OKs Adding Race
      to Deliberations on Criminal Justice Laws
    • Williams On Upcoming Budget Talks:
      If It Costs Money, It's 'Dead On Arrival'
  • Transportation
    • Rell: Scale Back Rail Project
    • TSB To Study Tolls

Lawlor Clears Up DeLuca Confusion

by Christine Stuart | June 12, 2007 1:17 PM
Posted to State Capitol

Christine Stuart photo
Judiciary Committee Co-Chairman Rep. Michael Lawlor, D-East Haven, tried to clarify the legislature’s ability to ouster Senate Minority Leader Louis DeLuca, R-Woodbury, should it wish to address the issue.

The Connecticut Constitution does not allow for the impeachment of members of the General Assembly, Lawlor said Monday in response to a number of news reports and editorials that have recently called for or speculated about the possible impeachment of a senator.

Lawlor explained that under the Connecticut Constitution, only “the governor, and all other executive and judicial officers” can be impeached.

However, he said, Article III, Section 13 of the state constitution provides that a legislator can be expelled or punished by a two-thirds vote of the chamber in which that legislator is a member.

“The impeachment an officer from the executive or judicial branch would require a hearing in the House of Representatives followed by a majority vote in the House. If the House votes to impeach, then there would then be a full trial in the Senate. Following the trial, removal from office would then require a two-thirds vote by the Senate,” he said.

“However, in the case of a legislator, only the body in which that legislator resides can punish or expel them. Either case would require a two-thirds vote by that chamber alone,” Lawlor said.

According to the non-partisan Office of Legislative Research, while no legislator has ever been expelled, the only legislator to be punished was former State Representative Russell Reynolds, who was censured and reprimanded by the House in 1980 after making a racist remark in a written press questionnaire. A resolution of expulsion had been considered in that case, but was never acted upon.

“Under our state constitution, a member of the House of Representatives can only be expelled or punished by the House, and a member of the Senate can only be expelled or punished by the Senate,” Lawlor said. “These procedures are very similar to the ones used in Congress under Article 1, Section 5 of the United States Constitution.”

Comments (1)

Posted by: Don Corn Leone | June 13, 2007 8:46 AM

Ok, so make him an offer he can't refuse. Get rid of him, and make it look silly.

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)