The U.S. Supreme Court denied a request for emergency relief to Leo Donofrio, the New Jersey man seeking to disqualify Barack Obama because he is not a natural born citizen as required by the U.S. Constitution. There are numerous other cases pending throughout the country, but it seems highly unlikely any case will get a serious hearing. Courts are dismissing the cases summarily because the citizen complainants lack standing to bring their case. None of the cases are being decided on the merits of the claim. WorldNetDaily has much more here.
UPDATE: Leo Donofrio tells readers at his blog to keep an eye on the Connecticut case, which is pending as a cert application before Justice Antonin Scalia.
5 comments:
Given the problem of standing (at least with plaintiffs thus far), what's the thinking concerning the role of procedures in Congress (as specified in constitution and augmented in the law (3 U.S.C. 1) concerning the counting of certified electoral votes? From the face of the language the process seems to have more to do with the regularity of the electoral process (appointment of electors, etc.) than with matters of presidential qualification, but after such a debate and vote, a Congressional ratification of a Presidential vote could be seen as conclusive. Otherwise the validity of all laws, etc., involving Presidential action could be challanged, and the standing reqirement broadened to include anyone touched sufficiently by the signed legislation, etc. I've not seen anything on that...have you?
That's the reason so many of the lawsuits seek to enjoin their state's electors from casting votes for Obama. Once the electoral college's vote is taken, it would be difficult to overturn the result. Democrats in Congress certainly aren't going to upset the electoral college outcome. Impeachment would be the route if it were later established that Obama lied, for instance, about his place of birth. With a Democratic-controlled Congress, it isn't going to happen.
Zctually we do not know why the court would not hear Donofrio's case, they did not give a reason. He suggested some problem with his case when it was in the lower court.
However, Justice Scalia has distributed for conference another case which Donofrio suggests is on more solid ground:
http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08a469.htm
It would appear to me on face value that a citizen has standing if a President meets the qualifications listed in the Constitution or doesn't.
That's sorta the whole point of a democracy.
Now if the court rules that the state of Hawaii fulfilled it's obligation of confirming the birth hospital on the original "long form" is another issue.
Would the court be able to force Congress from certifying the results until it's confirmed?
Or would that violate the separation of powers?
In fact, you'd need some Republican office holder in congress to makes a stink about that, I presume.
Fascinating stuff, but all for naught, I believe.
He was born in Hawaii (wouldn't the mother's passport show travel to Kenya?), the end.
I take it the Polarik "counterfeit" COLB theory has collapsed?
It's been pretty well debunked and that he was using faulty logic concerning graphics.
Or do we still hold on to that one?
Polarik's theory of the forged COLB has not changed. Donofrio's legal analysis is based on the citizenship of Obama's father as has been pointed out ad hominem on this blog. Philip Berg's lawsuit and a number of others argue the NBC requirement has not been satisfied based upon the assumption that Obama was born somewhere other than Hawaii. We may never know the real answer to that question since Obama appears prepared to go to his grave without ever producing his original birth certificate. It's funny that U.S. citizens petitioning to bring an alien relative are required to produce more evidence for the government than a candidate for president of the U.S.
Post a Comment