On the recordJanuary 23, 2011
But isn't that--go back to the Constitution. Now you are disagreeing with two out of three branches.
Source
congress.govEditor's note · Context
Quigley questions the interpretation of the courts regarding constitutional matters.
Share & report
More from Mike Quigley
Nov 7, 2023
Mr. Chairman, let us go back to the reality of the situation. I live in a transit-oriented development. I can walk 15 seconds outside my front door, get on the Red Line, and go downtown in Chicago, and I do. Many people do. There is a…
Nov 7, 2023
Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote. The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from South Carolina will be postponed. Amendment No. 67 Offered by Mr. Norman The…
Nov 7, 2023
Mr. Chair, let me begin by saying that the sponsor of this amendment, I believe, is on the T&I Committee, which has jurisdiction over aviation and rail. This is an amendment which would be better off being moved forward as an authorizing…
Nov 7, 2023
Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote. The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from South Carolina will be postponed. Amendment No. 63 Offered by Mr. Norman The…
Other voices in this conversation
