I would think that would be the job of the Supreme Court. They are the ones charged with swearing in the President. Since they are charged with upholding the Constitution, they would be obligated to ensure that the person they are swearing in is qualified for the office.
Since this issue has been brought to their attention, I think they are obligated to rule on it before the electoral college votes. I think it would be a dereliction of the constitutional duties to refuse to consider it. They may be free to ignore the evidence and rule any way they please, but I do believe they have an obligation to consider the issue.
I agree. It has to be Scotus. They interpret the constitution and they swear in the president.
It makes sense, but since it's never been an issue before who knows?
All the evidence indicates he was not born here, or if he was his mother renounced his citizenship so he could attend an Islamic school in Indonesia. But can anyone see the SCOTUS invalidating his election? I don't think they will do it.