Caroline Kennedy

Is she qualified to be NY Senator?

Is she 30, been a US resident for at least 9 years and been an inhabitant of that state for which she shall be chosen?

If the answer to all 3 are yes, then yes, she is qualified.

Well I saw where they have let a few in under 30

The constitution says 30 years old for the US Senate and I can't imagine someone not challenging it if someone under 30 were elected or appointed.

Perhaps you're thinking of the House of Representatives, which has a minimum age of 25 for elegibility.

No I'm talking about Senate.

I know the Const. says 30.

I can't remember the source so I cant check it out but they named a couple under 30 and no one challenged it.

So presumably the precedent has been set.

I will try to verify a source ok.

I saw it on one of the cable news shows.

(The way it came up they were talking about Chelsea, who is 28 I believe.)

John H Eaton was 28 when he was chosen to fill a vacancy in 1818 at the age of 28 (contrary to the requirements of the Constitution). He was subsequently elected and reelected to the post, serving until 1829.

That doesn't change the requirements set forth by the US Constitution and it certainly doesn't over ride those requirements.

It would not happen again. Not for Chelsea nor anyone else.

Well thanks Aaron I had not been able to find that but I was pretty sure they said it.

Are you sure it was only once?

I don't know if it's happened once, twice or a hundred times but it doesn't matter.

The constitution says 30 and there is no case of 'precedent' over riding what the constitution clearly states.

If David Patterson were to appoint Chelsea and the constitutionality of her taking the seat were challenged, she would lose.

And make no mistake about it, if she were appointed, it would be challenged.