Is this constitutional?

It is saying is it constitutional to dis-allow former government employees to be hired as lobbyists.

I think what is confusing you is bar? It just means to ban or simply “not let”.

So I would say that is unconstitutional because you can’t technically discriminate against someone because of their previous work experience? Is that logical? Or am I way off track?

Barring former government employees or former Congressmen in becoming lobbyists would make sense due to their previous positions in government. They would have strong political connections already in place which might give them an unfair and unethical advantage in trying to exploit and influence legislators.

Different words… “Is preventing former gov’t employees/congress members from becoming lobbyists supported by the Constitution? Or does the Constitution say nothing about this?”

I don’t believe the Constitution has anything to say about it.

But Congress does.

I think they should be able to work at a bar if they want to.

@bluefreedom…It certainly makes sense, but the question at hand is whether it’s constitutional. I’d take a stab and say it probably is since the constitution doesn’t have that many specific bans/etc. but I’d also have to answer with a resounding “no one here really knows.” Assuming, armywife, that you’re taking a con law class or something of the sort, you’re probably the best qualified to answer this one unless we’ve got some constitutional law scholars like, say, Barack Obama on here. Barack, a little help?

Congress may, but it’s SCOTUS’ job to interpret the constitution.

See, that’s what’s beautiful about our constitution, it was written simply enough that we don’t have to pay someone to teach us how to understand it. Now, the CFR is another animal…but that wasn’t the question.

I got lost at constitutionality of a bar. Hell yes. The repeal of the 18th amendment saw to that.

Restated: Is it consistent with the Constitution (constitutional) to bar (prevent, disallow) former government employees or former members of Congress from being hired as lobbyists?

The Constitution doesn’t say anything about this directly, of course. It doesn’t get into specifics like that. But has there ever been a Supreme Court case that dealt with this issue or a similar one? (It is the job of the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution and apply it to cases, and those cases set a precedent.) Is there anything in the Constitution that establishes a principle that could be applied to a case challenging or asserting such a right? That seems to be the intent of the question.

Is this a course in constitutional law?

I tend to think SCOTUS would decline to argue this due to it not really being a constitutional issue. My uneducated (aside from reading the constitution fairly regularly) opinion.

no, it’s a government 2. i’m taking it as an elective, i like to think about this kind of stuff. i don’t know why i drew such a blank on this one.

thanks for all your opinions, i turned those questions in today. maybe in a week or so i’ll post some more of them, i like to see everyone’s opinions. but i won’t do it now, i don’t want anyone to think they’re still doing my homework, lol.

Check your text on the 3 types of constitutional powers: expressed, inherent and implied

Well, this particular topic isn’t expressed in the Constitution so on that level it isn’t constitutional but that doesn’t mean it’s UNconstitutiona. (BTW “lobbyists” were not an entity when the Constitution was written)However, Congress has the constitutional power to make laws, so laws barring certain people from being lobbyists have constitutionality.

It’s like saying is Federal aid to public schools constitutional? It is not expressed in the Constitution but it is an implied power of Congress to give it.