[Non-Sequitur]

Those faithless elector laws are meaningless.

The law is never meaningless, unless you're a Democrat.

[bvw]

A state can’t force the electors in a FEDERAL election to do anything. I’m mean that’s the argument I’ve heard, and I do know that some 156 electors HAVE been faithless in the Electoral College vote.

http://www.fairvote.org/e_college/faithless.htm

According to Wikipedia “To date, faithless electors have never changed the otherwise expected outcome of the election. No faithless elector has ever been punished or charged with a crime.”

Yes, there is 1952’s Ray vs Blair. But just as Texas sodomy statutes got overturned after many precedents of US Law, why would not Ray vs Blair?

[bvw]

And besides, the Elector's HAVE to abide the US Constitution. Even if they swore to vote for Obama, that swearing means nothing if Obama is found to be ineligible. It's a nullity, not enforceable pledge.

And since the "who is responsible for vetting" seems to have been left BY THE COURTS to the electors -- the electors have a DUTY to NOT vote Obama if they, individually, do not find him to be eligible. And that finding, by each one, is in my humble opinion -- not reviewable.