You said — “I think you got part of it right. The SCOTUS can do nothing without evidence of violating a law or a question of legal interpretation.”
—
Yeah..., that’s pretty much it in a nutshell..
===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== =====
And then you said — “So once again the Donofrio case must establish what is proof of ‘natural born’. But from my understanding there are some State Department regs that state a COLB is not evidence of citizenship.
This case is not over and it may have legs.”
—
Now, here is where it gets somewhat murky with the Supreme Court. I can imagine that any case that gets decided on this question at a lower court, is going to go up to the Supreme Court, because neither side is going to accept the other side’s “win”...
And there, the Supreme Court can really go either way. You just don’t know about it. The definition that the Supreme Court comes down with — will decide — once and for all, what that particular definition is, and it may not be what some posters here are saying. I’m sure that they will not be happy to hear that, but that’s the way the Supreme Court does it sometimes and that could very well be the possibility. So, it’s not simply an “automatic win” if the Supreme Court gets the issue based on this “natural born” status question.
===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== =====
And lastly, I mention your comment — “However, one terrible fly in Obama’s ointment is the new law passed in Missouri (I believed it was passed) that requires presidential candidates to provide evidence meeting the constitutional requirement of ‘natural born’. That means this becomes an unavoidable issue for the 2012 election if America survives until then.”
—
Well..., that’s news to me about Missouri. I was aware of Arizona and Oklahoma (I’m in Oklahoma and have been supporting that legislation here).
Do you have a FReeper posting or reference to that one. I would be interested, as I see *that method* as the method to stop Obama in the next election.
It’s one thing for him to sue one state, but if he has to sue three states (the ones that are putting that into effect now), that will really be news. But, what if he has to sue 20 states!! Boy! That will really be news! LOL...
Missouri has introduced it but I think has not yet passed it. So I was a bit early on that one.
The Donofrio case is interesting because it does not beg for evidence that he was not born in the USA. It petitions that the public information that Obama Sr. was a Kenyan and actually a British subject at the time of Obama Jr.’s birth, and the historical record of how the term ‘natural born’ is to be interpreted, that this is claimed to infer Obama’s ineligibility.
However, Donofrio can subpoena the vaulted long form from Hawaii as evidence of the father’s nationality. Whether or not Obama complies with such a subpoena or fights to quash it, he becomes cornered UNLESS there really is a vaulted long form certificate that indeed shows he was born in Hawaii.
The way I see it is if Obama motions to quash a Donofrio subpoena to produce the vaulted long form, then Americans will conclude he is hiding from the truth.
If he produces the vaulted long form, then Donofrio can still go forward on the issue of how the Founders intended the meaning of ‘natural born’.