PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
yes....I read my own source.....the most qualified person to flll Feinstein's seat till the election is from Maryland......
because no one else has......Newsome can't find a good candidate in California
- Thread starter PostmodernProphet
- Start date
yes....I read my own source.....the most qualified person to flll Feinstein's seat till the election is from Maryland......
Nope.
She doesn't meet the residency requirement, and hence will not run for a full term.
What are the California Residency requirements?
Bigdog
Harris - make America a 3rd world shithole
Racially Diverse, i.e. high percentage of Black Americans.
The Northern Dems segregate their few Blacks in the big cities.
You aren't very diverse if you only include one minority in your diversity classification.
cawacko
Well-known member
To me, based on how we use the word diversity it has a fluid meaning. Sometimes diversity includes the BIPOC coalition. But other times it means simply black people.
Two examples come to mind. Lowell High School in San Francisco is the top public high school here. It's 18% white but yet people claim it lacks diversity. The school is a majority Asian and what they really mean is they don't feel it has enough black students.
We can look at Major League Baseball. On the whole the league has become less white and more global with far more Latin players playing. Yet people say the league is losing diversity. I know I did a double take. What they mean again is less black people are playing.
We could go on and on but (racial) diversity does not have a single meaning.
Bigdog
Harris - make America a 3rd world shithole
It is an example. Obviously, there are other races in the South, too.
Get back to me to when Dems stop SEGREGATING their cities. and you have something other than a childish argument.
Lightbringer
Loves Me Some Souls
I think Newsom just gave Schiff the big middle finger.
Are you saying I need to diversify my argument so it is as narrow as your is?
California has much more diversity than Alabama, Mississippi and Arkansas do.
The US constitution has these three requirements for a Senator:
The Constitution sets three qualifications for service in the U.S. Senate: age (at least thirty years of age); U.S. citizenship (at least nine years); and residency in the state a senator represents at time of election.
I don't think California has a residency time other than what they require for normal residents, however I can't just say I live there today and be called a "resident" (it has to be 366 days, one day more than a year, I checked), and the Senator must be a resident per the US Constitution in order to be elected, it does not say anything about the ones being selected by Governors. She would not have been eligible to run for the Senate when he selected her as she had no residency in California.
She is not elected, there is no time of her election. It would appear an appointed Senator does not have to be a resident, but how do you define resident?
Living in Maryland for work, but considering yourself a Californian because you intend to return when the job is over, could be considered a resident.
I'm not saying being selected is out of the question I am just noting that until she's lived there for 366 days she isn't a resident of California and could not run in an election per the US Constitution.
If, according to what I read, she pays CA state taxes and is only outside of the state temporarily. She would have to show that she has had a living presence in CA, keep her CA driver's license, and not be officially a resident of another state. This is counted as "intent to maintain" residency for students and other temporary living arrangements such as a job. Exceptions are: if you have a spouse living in CA, dependents living in CA, or are in the Military.
Why 366 days?
That's what they require to establish residency. I didn't write it. Ask the Californian legislature... LOL
It said "one year and one day" then gave (366 days) in parentheses like you can't add one to 365...
So there is a California law on this issue? Or are you talking about their law for others things and extrapolating it to the Constitutional senatorial election requirement?
I am talking about the CA law that talks about establishing residency. If I move there, get a driver's license within 10 days of moving there, establish a residency, then don't leave (it even says that if I leave for a month it will question my "intent" to become a resident) I can then claim residency in CA after I have lived there one year and one day (366 days). This is for folks who are residents of other states then move there.
If I live there and leave...
I have to keep my CA driver's license, voter registration, and come back during the year (can't be absent the entire year), and not become a resident of the state where I am "temporarily" residing for work or as a student. If I meet those requirements I have maintained my residency in CA. If I fail to meet them there are the exceptions I listed.
Once she became a resident of Maryland she was no longer considered a resident of California. If she officially became a resident of Maryland. You know, driver's license, etc.
So its a law addressing residency generally, not for any specific purpose. I know some states define residency for the purposes of in-state tuition in one way, but residency of a Drivers Licenses another way, and then don't have a law as it relates to unnamed reasons for establishing residency.
Correct. I am just looking up requirements for CA residency. It gave me how to become one, how to maintain residency if I leave and want to come back and still be considered a resident, and exceptions lists. I reported back.
Unfortunately I am using a work research tool for laws and I cannot provide links to what I am looking at. LOL I am just reporting what I am reading about residency laws in CA.