Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: John Valentine
The Supremes do have a history of actually reading and applying the Constitution, after all, and they ARE sworn to do so.

Like Roe v Wade? The Constitution itself does not define "natural born citizen" so that allows a lot of latitude in how the SC might interpret this if they even took the issue. Not to mention the politics that comes into play regarding a sitting President's qualifications. The court is split down the middle so I don't have much faith in them on this issue. Like I said it was an opinion. You have yours as well. We'll probably never know because I don't think they will ever rule on this matter.

51 posted on 08/26/2009 4:18:46 PM PDT by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]


To: plain talk

Did you read my entire post?


52 posted on 08/26/2009 4:35:06 PM PDT by John Valentine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson