Who has standing and authority to cause the enforcement of the 20th Amendment when a President elect (the certified winner of the electoral vote) has failed to qualify?
The judiciary can always define terms out of its jurisdiction. The Vietnam War, for instance, was not a war. We haven’t had a “war” since WWII. We’ve had “conflicts”, which is how they get out of the Constitutional requirement for Congress to declare war. To take on that issue the judiciary would have to define “war”, as distinct from a “conflict”. As long as the political powers are willing to let a “conflict” involve multiple other countries, etc there was no reason to even call WWII a war.
Right now, given the precedents that have been set, somebody who is not even the President (as per the Terry Lakin case) could issue lawful orders to blast all of Europe and Africa to Mars without even asking Congress about it. And as long as they were willing to say that it was just a “mere flesh wound” (a “conflict” and not a war) no judge in the country would have to even look at it.
We are literally lawless. Because we have given up the language and we’re given over to post-modernism where truth doesn’t really exist. We’re hopeless. This country is dead. Trying to make sense out of this lawless world is about like trying to sew clouds. There’s no integrity so everything’s just “flexible” - IOW, whoever is in power does whatever they want and unless we’re willing to shoot back he’ll get away with it. The only future for a society like ours is tyranny followed by annihilation. We’re no longer either worthy or capable of a free society.
Any single Senator combined with any one member of the House of Representatives can submit a written objection to the certification of the electoral votes at the Joint Session of Congress held to count and certify the vote of the electors.
Can you imagine what would have happened if written objections stating that Obama had failed to qualify and therefore his electors were unauthorized, had been submitted to the President of the Senate signed by 232 Republican congressmen and women and all 45 Republican Senators?
...and they always have. Marbury v. Madison (1803), while it's remembered as the case which established the power of the courts to review the constitutionality of acts of Congress, was also a case in which the Supreme Court held that Thomas Jefferson had acted illegally but there was nothing the Court could do about it. Frothingham v. Mellon, 262 U.S. 447, which I meant to cite in my last post but missed, was decided in 1923, and established the principle that no one has standing to object in court to Congress's spending money on unconstitutional purposes. United States v, Schlesinger, which I did mention in my last post, found another part of the Constitution to beyond the power of the courts to enforce. Somehow, the Republic has survived those decisions, and I suspect it will survive Obama's presidency as well.