[Centurion2000]

I'm sure the Obama camp would immediately appeal to the US Supreme Court, citing some vague "always thought he was an American" excuse, just like the family story he always thought was true about his uncle.

Then the MSM will drum up support for calling it an archaic "technicality" that should be overruled by the USSC because of the immense popularity of Obama,

USSC literally could not rule on this as it is in black and white in the Constitution. There is ZERO wiggle room for interpretation on this.

[Political Junkie Too]

I don't trust the USSC to be so black-and-white anymore. I thought the eminent domain language was clear, but they found a way with Kelo to take your private property and give it to other private entities. What's to stop them from declaring someone eligible to be president for the common good, or by using the commerce clause, or other such emanation from a penumbra?

-PJ

[Jeff Head]

There is wiggle room on the definition of "natural born", which is the question here. That definition has been changed in the US code numerous times in the 1900s. 1934, 1941, 1952, and 1986. Within those time frames and before, the law in place at the time governs.

So the USSC could rule on which defiintion is the "one" definition to be used as regards the US constitution and the eligibilty for the office of the Presidency.

Here's a good site regarding the same.