Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Jim Noble

“In any event, expanding further the already grotesquely expanded power of SCOTUS was then, and still is, a bad idea.”

Absolutely correct!

The Court could (and in my opinion, should) conclude there is presently a remedy to the O eligibility issue clearly set out in the Consitution. It is to be found in the 20th amendment provision regarding Objections to the electoral vote on Jan 8, ‘09. It is not complicated language and demonstrates the founders and ratifiers were thinking ahead and knew what they werre doing. We should be so lucky! There is no Constitutional crisis. Unless the Dems refuse to honor that plain language.

Over the years the Court has taken it upon itself to become the unelected Supreme Legislature. Talk about becoming a nanny state!

STAND UP AMERICA! The presidential election is not over!
We voted for electors, not the individual candidates. The electors vote on or after December 15, 2009. The results are then presented to a joint session of Congress and objections may be heard on January 8, 2009 pursuant to the 20th amendment and Public Law 110-430. See the letter on my About page hand-delivered to the local offices of my Republican Senators and Representatives. I urge you to take similar action, even if it is simply faxing a one page letter to Washington, D.C.


168 posted on 11/28/2008 6:33:59 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 113 | View Replies ]


To: frog in a pot
The Court could (and in my opinion, should) conclude there is presently a remedy to the O eligibility issue clearly set out in the Consitution. It is to be found in the 20th amendment provision regarding Objections to the electoral vote on Jan 8, ‘09. It is not complicated language and demonstrates the founders and ratifiers were thinking ahead and knew what they werre doing. We should be so lucky! There is no Constitutional crisis

Exactly so!

If this is not a nonjusticeable political question, nothing is.

The founders, of course, anticipated this situation and provided for it in the allocation of powers among the political branches.

Why do you suppose they put the outgoing VP, all the Senators, and all the Members of Congress in one room and made them count the votes?

Because they had nothing else to do?

Feh! If SCOTUS had refused to hear Bush v. Gore, we as a nation would be a lot better off.

183 posted on 11/28/2008 7:31:55 PM PST by Jim Noble (I have read a fiery gospel, writ in burnished rows of steel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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