Replies

Wouldn't you have to mount the challenge in a state Obama actually carried?

Even if you crossed him off the ballot in Alabama (months after the election) it wouldn't change anything.

Really this case is not about the election results. Its about Beth Chapman not doing the SOS job and checking the eligibility of a candidate when presented with doubts from an “official” source.

Obama isn't being sued, Chapman is. The remedy is that she do her job, according to a strict Mandamus, if the Judges defend the US constitution as they swore to do.

That would fall under the category of 'mootness'. Like many of the trolls here state, Obama won the election, so there is nothing you can do. There is some truth to that. And if there is nothing the legal system can do, the courts will dismiss the case as being 'moot'.

BUT, a case can get around the 'mootness' by showing that the situation is repeatable. That is what they are doing here. They are telling the court, we need to continue with this case, so that in the future, when this happens again, a legal precedence is established. An example of this, and a case cited, is Roe v Wade. By the time the case reached the courts, Roe had already had her baby - so it was a 'moot' issue. The case continued, so the courts could decide on future situations.