Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

20th Amendment Sct3: "if the President elect shall have failed to qualify"
Constitution of the United States ^ | January 23, 1933 | US Constitution

Posted on 12/09/2008 9:59:02 AM PST by Kevmo

Section 3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.


TOPICS: History; Miscellaneous; Reference; Society
KEYWORDS: certifigate; rallyusa
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-91 next last
To: Yaelle

I am so with you. I don’t expect to get a Republican President out of this! I expect for our Constitution not to be worthless.


41 posted on 12/09/2008 11:20:22 AM PST by autumnraine (Churchill: " we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall never surrender")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: frog in a pot

Oh, cr**...Hillary...Bubba would be her Secretary of State AND she would get what’s left of Obama’s purse. Obama would get UN rep...”President of the World” in his eyes.


42 posted on 12/09/2008 11:20:45 AM PST by Sacajaweau (I'm planting corn...Have to feed my car...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: frog in a pot
You are right...I can see the family resemblance now that you mention it.

Photobucket

43 posted on 12/09/2008 11:21:40 AM PST by IrishPennant (Patriotism is strongest when accompanied by bad politics, loyal FRiends and great whiskey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle
I give a lot of credit to the foresight of the Framers to the Constitution, but the 20th amendment was submitted to Congress in 1932.

-PJ

44 posted on 12/09/2008 11:22:49 AM PST by Political Junkie Too (You can never overestimate the Democrats' ability to overplay their hand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too

“I give a lot of credit to the foresight of the Framers to the Constitution, but the 20th amendment was submitted to Congress in 1932.”

You point is well taken. However, it is obvious the authors of any amendment are yet framing the constitution or, at a minimum, reframing the constitution.


45 posted on 12/09/2008 11:36:11 AM PST by frog in a pot (Is there a definition of "domestic enemies" as used in federal oaths, or is that just lip service?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo

First 0bama IS NOT President-Elect until the Electoral College votes and the votes are counted in Congress. Biden should have no trouble qualifying as Acting President, since he actually was born in the US. He’s an idiot, but unfortunately that doesn’t disqualify him. If 0bama is permanently disqualified, which being foreign born would do, I would guess that Biden would nominate Hildabeast to be President of Vice. Once confirmed, I’d expect Biden to suffer another another “brain attack” or meet with an unfortunate accident and the Beast becomes President.


46 posted on 12/09/2008 11:37:29 AM PST by The Sons of Liberty (NO Kenyan Usurpers in the White House - NObama !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IrishPennant

Every once in a while a post will make me involuntarily laugh out loud.
Thanks.


47 posted on 12/09/2008 11:51:51 AM PST by frog in a pot (Is there a definition of "domestic enemies" as used in federal oaths, or is that just lip service?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: The Sons of Liberty

Vox Populi said CHANGE!!!!!, but d9d they mean the Constitution?
barbra ann


48 posted on 12/09/2008 11:55:59 AM PST by barb-tex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: river rat
"My fear, is that the SCOTUS will blink at the prospect of massive race riots by blacks incensed that their con artist and corrupt “bro” was denied the fruits of his crimes...."

I simply don't believe that is true. It is more that the members of the Court see no credible evidence that Obama's qualification is doubtful. That should be a signal to some folks.

Some of the very same people who thought Thomas, Alito and Roberts were the greatest guys in the world now seem to believe that they would totally ignore the Constitution for political reasons.

49 posted on 12/09/2008 12:03:56 PM PST by JustaDumbBlonde (America: Home of the Free Because of the Brave)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: mhx
The “people” asked the state of Hawaii if Obama was born there. They said yes. The court thinks that’s good enough. End of story.

Wow!! They said that. Yup, end of story. How could we have all missed this? Boy, were we wrong.

50 posted on 12/09/2008 12:04:47 PM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

“Oh, cr**...Hillary...Bubba would be her Secretary of State AND she would get what’s left of Obama’s purse. Obama would get UN rep...”President of the World” in his eyes.”

Quite accurate. That and perhaps more, that we lowlies do not know about, may be what the Republican members of Congress are facing. The dilemma for them may be whether to avoid the ugliest scenario at the expense of their oaths.

Ordinarily, I am an optimist. But it seems our nation presently may be in an unwinnable situation.

Also expect O would be a shoo-in for any UN post.

“The Marxists and Capitalists are struggling in a non-violent civil war for the government of our nation, but only the Marxists seem to know that”


51 posted on 12/09/2008 12:05:52 PM PST by frog in a pot (Is there a definition of "domestic enemies" as used in federal oaths, or is that just lip service?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: LucyT

Thanks for the great update to important links, LucyT

Ping

See Post # 19


52 posted on 12/09/2008 12:09:44 PM PST by Iowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo

Bookmark.


53 posted on 12/09/2008 12:31:19 PM PST by little jeremiah (Leave illusion, come to the truth. Leave the darkness, come to the light.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate

There are provisions of the 14th amendment being ignored as well, from what I hear. If we throw that whole amendment out, slavery will be allowed. This is a constitutional nightmare if the Supreme Court doesn’t protect it.


54 posted on 12/09/2008 12:37:17 PM PST by Kevmo (Palin/Hunter 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: river rat

What are rational folks to think of a President elect who refused to provide and spends a fortune to deny the electorate proof of his qualifications to serve?
***What are rational folks to think of the Supreme Court? It’s their freeping job. That’s why they have lifetime appointment, to be free of political constraints. If they go down the wrong path on this, which I see as very likely, it’s the end of our constitutional republic and they have voted themselves into irrelevance.


55 posted on 12/09/2008 12:39:39 PM PST by Kevmo (Palin/Hunter 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

Yeah...I missed the elect part.


56 posted on 12/09/2008 12:43:38 PM PST by B Knotts (ConservatismCentral.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: mhx

Unfortunately, at this point, he’s qualified.
***The same 20th Amendment puts the burden of proof squarely on the president elect to Qualify. Where has he met that burden? Do we get to see his birth certificate? NO!

The “people” asked the state of Hawaii if Obama was born there. They said yes. The court thinks that’s good enough. End of story.
***You just plain got that wrong. Reassess the facts. You and I and us freepers are “the people” and we do not have the birth certificate, and per the 20th amendment he has not met the burden of proof of qualification.

If the Supreme Court took the case, I can guarantee you they will just ask the state of Hawaii to show them the birth certificate, and then the court will just say “looks good enough to me”, regardless of any other evidence that’s presented.
***I’m not interested in your guarantees. I’m interested in the constitution being upheld.

There is no way they are going to believe any of the other evidence more than they will believe a government making an official statement.
***Who is “they” in this sentence? It doesn’t make sense.

No good can possibly come from pursuing it anymore, regardless of the rightness of the cause.
***Wrong. The 20th amendment spells it out. Election results are subordinate to Qualification. That’s the way our founding fathers intended it, that’s the way it’s written, that’s the way it oughta be and it is my hope that that’s the way the Supreme Court (who gets paid to uphold the constituion) will decide.

You don’t always get to win. It is time to work on doing things that will lead to victory.
***You may start looking at the definition of CoLB Troll and see if it applies to yourself. This is a constitutionalist website, this is a constitutional issue, and we don’t really need bozos like you pushing for more compromise on deep seated constitutional issues any more than we need a new hole in our heads.


57 posted on 12/09/2008 12:45:35 PM PST by Kevmo (Palin/Hunter 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo

Well with the new tax laws being promised we will all be slaves to the socialist state!


58 posted on 12/09/2008 12:46:12 PM PST by stockpirate (Left ignores Constitution except 16th amendment, can we ignore the 16th amendment?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: bvw

There’s a distinct possibility. I suppose we should let some lawyers weigh in on what happens next.


59 posted on 12/09/2008 12:47:16 PM PST by Kevmo (Palin/Hunter 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: frog in a pot; Congressman Billybob; Duncan Hunter; Duncan Hunter Ambassador

So, January 8th would be the day for any congressmen who have objections, to voice them. It could prove to be career making or career breaking. Like the Chinese say, we live in interesting times.


60 posted on 12/09/2008 12:49:11 PM PST by Kevmo (Palin/Hunter 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-91 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

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