Replies

Well according to my favorite SCOTUS Justice, Scalia, Bingham’s opinion is no more credible than yours or mine. In fact his would probably have less credibility according to Scalia since a congressman speaking on behalf of passing legislation is likely to say anything to pass said legislation. I put much less credibility to Vattel than I give Wong Kim Ark and its 1000 plus case progeny.

The reason the Senate Resolution refers both of McCain's parents being citizens is because McCain was not born within the sovereign territory of the USA, but rather in the Panama Canal Zone which was the sovereign territory of Panama. It that fact which caused the inclusion of that language. Obama’s fact situation is completely different, and frankly I would think it rather embarrassing for birthers to try and make an analogy between the two different situations.

Can an AG file a suit to clarify the eligibility of a candidate? The reason I suggested that the SOS deny placement on the ballot is because then there is clear injury which gives the candidate standing to have the case heard. If the AG could file a suit contesting eligibility or asking advice, and the court would have to hear it, that would be a way to keep there from even being a defendant and any “conflict of interest” from AG v SOS.

The trick is to eliminate the problem of “standing”, so that the courts CANNOT refuse to decide the case on its merits.

Would there be any legal problem with an AG being required to challenge a candidate’s eligibility or request judicial clarification that would also then be subject to review by SCOTUS?

Bingham's opinion is deffinately weighty on the issue of citizenship. He was one of (if not the) principle author on the 14th Amendment.

I'll see you a (great) justice Scalia, and raise you the great Chief justice from the founding era, Marshall from

THE VENUS, 12 U.S. (8 Cranch) 253, 289 (1814) (A case on citizenship and domicile. Marshall, C.J. concurring) (cites Vattel six (6) times by name, and "law of nations" ten (10) times.)
"Vattel, who, though not very full to this point, is more explicit and more satisfactory on it than any other whose work has fallen into my hands, says
"The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens. Society not being able to subsist and to perpetuate itself but by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights."

Oh, and the WKA court found Mr. Ark...who was born in the states to LEGAL immigrant and permanently domiciled parents...to be a "citizen." The topic is "Natural Born Citizen" as required for POTUS eligibility. So what's your point?