AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL NOBEL?

Posted By on October 19th, 2009

http://www.nysun.com/editorials/an-unconstitutional-nobel/86886/?print=6998495521

Section: Editorials > Printer-Friendly Version

An Unconstitutional Nobel?
Editorial of The New York Sun | October 18, 2009
http://www.nysun.com/editorials/an-unconstitutional-nobel/86886/
Apart from the question of whether President Obama deserves the Nobel Prize — a matter that we’ve suggested is the purview of the Norwegians — the newspapers are starting to crackle with the question of whether the Constitution permits Mr. Obama to accept it. The Nobel, after all, is worth more than $1 million, and Article I, Second 9 of the United States Constitution states in plain language that “No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States” and that “no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign state.”

Josh Gerstein, formerly national correspondent of the Sun, reports on Politico that the White House is rejecting as “flat out wrong” the notion that the Nobel Prize would be covered by the proscriptions in the Constitution. “The Constitution talks about kings and princes and foreign states,” Mr. Gerstein quotes a White House aide as asserting. “Here, Alfred Nobel, a private citizen, set up a private foundation — the Nobel Foundation — that awards the money.” The aide wouldn’t be named, Mr. Gerstein said, quoting him as also pointing out that Mr. Obama “has already indicated that he does not intend to keep the money.”

The anonymous comment from the White House followed the publication by the Washington Post of an op-ed article by a law professor from Chapman University, Ron Rotunda, and a fellow of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, Peter Pham, arguing that the constitutional provision in Article I, Second 9 would preclude Mr. Obama accepting the prize. They argued that Congress should take Mr. Obama “at his word that the Nobel award is ‘an affirmation of American leadership’” and allow the president to accept the prize but that Congress should apply the money itself to “some worthy cause, such as reducing the deficit.”

Mr. Gerstein sprang on the issue on the day the prize was announced, as did J.P. Freire, associate commentary editor of the Washington Examiner. Mr. Freire quoted Title 5 of the United States code, under which Congress has laid down the law on gifts that can be accepted by a federal employee. It provides congressional consent to gifts in certain situations but sets a limit that, at the moment, is, according to the Justice Department Web site, $335. The law covers both the president and vice president as well as all other federal employees, including congressmen. So even were the Constitutional question to be vague, the statute seems to be clear. President Washington was such a stickler on the constitutional point that he refused to accept so much as a flag from the government of France without stating that he would announce the matter to the Congress and declaring that the colors would be placed in the national archive.

Categorized under: BOOKS.
Tagged with: no tags.

Comments are closed.