Replies

Today the Writ must be served to the US Attorney in the Washington D.C. District. The US Attorney is required to notify Congress of the Writ. The Writ would not be heard in a Federal Court. Both Houses of Congress would be convened to try it. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court would preside over the Congressional hearing.

Citation, please?

Actually, the correct legal term would be ‘precedent’. My attempt was what is believed to be the “Intent of the Founders’, because recall had been removed from the Constitution when the Articles of Confederation was rewritten.

In addition, I will hazard a guess that you believe “We the People” do not have the right to question Barack Hussein Obama’s birth records? If not, then why did the Founders place in Article II of the Constitution the requirements to be the President of the United States?

Furthermore, do you believe the 9th does not give the people the right to question elected officials? At this time, according to the Courts, the Congress has to file such a suit. As for such decisions, argue with the Justices and the lower courts, I didn't rule on the plethora of cases that have set precedent over the years.

Most of all, read the Federalist Papers (#62) on elections. The States should be the ones properly vetting the candidates. Each Secretary of State should vet any candidate who is running in their state, whether, local, state, or Federal. If not, exactly who is in place to protect "We the People" from people who are highly questionable? In posting this, remember, local, and State elections 'do' matter.