A Bill Requiring Documentation of Presidential Eligibility for Candidates Available to Electoral Voters
Whereas the US Constitution makes states responsible to choose Presidential electors and the Congressional Research Service has concluded that “there is no specific federal agency or office that “vets” candidates for federal office as to qualifications or eligibility prior to election. The mechanics of elections of federal officials within the several states are administered under state law.”,
Whereas the only security clearance given to the Commander-in-Chief is the vote of the people, who do not individually have authority to demand documentation necessary for such a security clearance;
Whereas the US Constitution says, “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States”; and
Whereas the US Constitution gives the US judiciary both jurisdiction and responsibility to decide in law and fact all controversies and cases arising from the Constitution, including US Supreme Court original jurisdiction for cases in which a State is a party,
Therefore be it resolved that:
Before being placed on a ballot, a candidate for President or Vice-President must state his/her name and place of birth and parents’ names, provide proof of being a US resident for 14 years, and sign a consent form for the Secretary of State to receive certified copies of all his/her birth records and all his/her and his/her parents’ citizenship records – including all written and embedded transaction logs for all records.
The Secretary of State must secure all said records, redact information to comply with state and FOIA privacy provisions, and post scans of the documents to the Secretary of State’s website. Redacted originals must be made available for public viewing.
The Secretary of State must also complete and post to the SOS website a list saying whether the records confirm that the candidate was born in the United States to 2 US citizen parents, will be at least 35 by the start of the Presidential term, and has been a US resident for 14 years, and show no discrepancies in transaction logs that call into question the veracity or legal validity of the records.
If any of these conditions is not met, if any above procedure is not completed, or if any person contests the eligibility of the candidate within 30 days after both the documents and the list are posted to the website, the Secretary of State shall deny placement on the ballot unless and until the judiciary, with all appeals exhausted, rules the candidate eligible. The State AG shall submit to the court any amicus briefs from the public in any lawsuits concerning the implementation or constitutionality of this law.
If a lawsuit is filed with the state judiciary, the case shall be heard and decided on an expedited basis.
This law shall be in effect as soon as it is signed by the governor. If a provision of this bill is or becomes illegal, invalid or unenforceable in any jurisdiction, that shall not affect:
1. the validity or enforceability in that jurisdiction of any other provision of this bill; or
2. the validity or enforceability in other jurisdictions of that or any other provision of this bill.
I would add a couple of lines so that there is no blurring of intent and eliminate any and all ‘loopholes’:
This law should also apply to any sitting president who seeks reelection. Since this bill has been updated and with stricter rules, any and all evidence of his eligibility previously supplied by the sitting president, will be set aside and he shall be required to resubmit new, in depth, documents asserting his eligbility.
In addition, the chosen running mate of the president shall undergo the same requirements as the president as stated in this bill.
1. If a candidate's parent(s) are still alive, they can deny access to their own birth certificate, thus denying the candidate those records. In which way would this be legal, since the Constitution doesn't allow for it?
2. Assuming that the transaction log section of your law passed muster (which is doubtful), what if the transaction logs didn't exist at the time the records were generated, or were lost or destroyed? Are you going to make the candidate responsible for something entirely outside his/her control?
3. Where in the Constitution does it say that one's parents must provide or prove their places of birth? Or that the candidate is responsible for the state's record-keeping system, something over which he/she has no legal control or right to see?
4. Since certified birth records from one state are recognized by all other states, where do you get the right to demand more (the transaction records) from? What if the other state's laws don't allow for sharing of those records?
B. If any of these conditions is not met, if any above procedure is not completed, or if any person contests the eligibility of the candidate within 30 days after both the documents and the list are posted to the website, the Secretary of State shall deny placement on the ballot unless and until the judiciary, with all appeals exhausted, rules the candidate eligible. The State AG shall submit to the court any amicus briefs from the public in any lawsuits concerning the implementation or constitutionality of this law.
1.That means that if would take 50-some people (assuming one per state & Washington, DC, plus 1 for every territory with voting rights*) to force a candidate to litigate in every single state, plus all of the far-flung territories. You've just assured that only the most wealthy candidates can possibly attempt a run for national office.
2. It also means that any opponent on either side (since all of this is taking place before the primaries) can prevent anyone they like from qualifying for the ballot unless they spend an arm and a leg for no real reason whatsoever other than the fact that people complained.
C.If a lawsuit is filed with the state judiciary, the case shall be heard and decided on an expedited basis.
1.Who gets to decide what "expedited" means?
2.Who pays for the defendant's (i.e., the candidate's) legal costs if he/she can't afford them?
3.What if a SoS is a member of the opposite party or a friend of one of the other candidates in the primary, and decides to slow down the process and causes the candidate in question to miss the deadline?
4.If 100 people file objections based on 100 different reasons, are there 100 cases to litigate, or 1 or what?
Essentially, you seem to be demanding rights (the right to other state's record keeping, for example) that appear no where in the constitution and which have never been recognized anywhere else.
Also, you're ignoring the fact that birth records are considered prima facie evidence and need nothing to back them up . See: Mills v. Duryee http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a4_1s10.html
* If I recall correctly, the territories are allowed to vote in the primaries and send delegates to the conventions, but do not vote in the general election).