Posted on 12/01/2008 12:52:16 PM PST by jeffo
Well, I had written to Senator Martinez ("R"-Florida) about the citizenship issue before the election. Today I got this mind-boggling response:
========================
Thank you for contacting me regarding President-Elect Obama's citizenship. I appreciate hearing from you and would like to respond to your concerns.
Like you, I believe that our federal government has the responsibility to make certain that the Constitution of the United States is not compromised. We must fight to uphold our Constitution through our courts and political processes.
Article II of the Constitution provides that "no Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President." The Constitution, however, does not specify how that qualification for office is to be enforced. As you may know, a voter recently raised this issue before a federal court in Pennsylvania. On October 24, 2008, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania released an order in the case of Berg v.Obama.In that case, the plaintiff, Phillip Berg, raised the same issue that your letter raises regarding proof of the President-Elect's birthplace. Through his lawsuit, Mr. Berg sought to compel President-Elect Obama to produce a certified copy of his birth certificate.
The District Court dismissed Mr. Berg's suit and held that the question of Obama's citizenship is not a matter for a court to decide. The court further noted that voters, not courts, should decide whether a particular presidential candidate is qualified to hold office.
Presidential candidates are vetted by voters at least twice - first in the primary elections and again in the general election. President-Elect Obama won the Democratic Party's nomination after one of the most fiercely contested presidential primaries in American history. And, he has now been duly elected by the majority of voters in the United States. Throughout both the primary and general election, concerns about Mr. Obama's birthplace were raised. The voters have made clear their view that Mr. Obama meets the qualifications to hold the office of President.
After he is sworn into office, Mr. Obama will be our nation's President and I intend to bestow upon him the honor and respect due any man who holds that Office. Yet, I am certain that there will be times when I will disagree and oppose President Obama's policies. When that happens, you can be assured that I will pursue vigorously what I believe to be in the best interest of Florida and the nation.
I thank you for sharing your views with me and will keep your concerns in mind. If you have additional questions or comments, please contact me. For more information about issues and activities important to Florida, please sign up for my weekly newsletter at http://martinez.senate.gov.
Sincerely,
Mel Martinez United States Senator
=======================
OK, so the fact that he won the election makes him qualified. Amazing
Who said anything about him having to "do" anything? That's a straw man. This is about Martinez's Lewis Carroll version of the constitution. "What is he supposed to do?" For starters, he can quit making up stuff about what he thinks constitutes eligibility.
Like I said in my post, the outrage is not in Martinez's acceptance of the election outcome; it's his explanation for that acceptance that's at issue. This is separate and apart from the BC issue.
Martinez is perfectly within his rights to choose to do nothing based on perceived futility, expedience, or fear of ridicule. But that's not what he's done. He, and other senators sending out this letter, either believe the constitution provides for Americans to decide that eligibility means whatever they say it means every four years, or they're lying to Americans about it. That's my beef, and should be yours too.
If you can’t convince a single judge in the United States that you have a case, then there is something wrong with your case. I find the entire topic rather preposterous.
“The Constitution, however, does not specify how that qualification for office is to be enforced.”
(AND)
“The court further noted that voters, not courts, should decide whether a particular presidential candidate is qualified to hold office.”
HOWEVER:
The Keyes’ lawsuit cites PRECEDENCE for how these constitutional REQUIREMENTS have been policed (‘enforced.’) in the past by the California Secretary of State (SOS) — before the election.
Note that one candidate, Mr. Cleaver, UNSUCCESSFULLY challenged, to the Supreme Court of the United States, the decision by the California SOS to remove him from the ballet.
Therefore, the assertion that the ‘voters’ are (solely) responsible for vetting a candidate appears to be flawed.
THE KEYES’ LAWSUIT:
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE
http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/AlanKeyesSuit.pdf
EXCERPT:
BACKGROUND OF THE CASE
78. The Office of the Secretary of State of California is the California agency responsible for certifying candidates for inclusion on the ballot. Historically, California Secretaries of State have exercised their due diligence by reviewing necessary background documents, verifying that the candidates that were submitted by the respective political parties as eligible for the ballot were indeed eligible. In 1968, the Peace and Freedom Party submitted the name of Eldridge Cleaver as a qualified candidate for President of the United States. The then SOS, Mr. Frank Jordan, found that, according to Mr. Cleaver’s birth certificate, he was only 34 years old, one year shy of the 35 years of age needed to be on the ballot as a candidate for President. Using his administrative powers, Mr. Jordan removed Mr. Cleaver from the ballot. Mr. Cleaver unsuccessfully challenged this decision to the Supreme Court of the State of California, and, later, to the Supreme Court of the United States. Similarly, in 1984, the Peace and Freedom Party listed Mr. Larry Holmes as an eligible candidate in the Presidential primary. When the then SOS checked his eligibility, it was found that Mr. Holmes was similarly not eligible, and Mr. Holmes was removed from the ballot. Currently, we have a similar situation in that the Democratic Party has submitted the name of Senator Barack Obama as candidate for President.
STE=Q
Obviously, they are feeling the need to respond to this issue due to the volume of calls and letters. Since multiple people have received these from different critters, it means the message is getting out in large enough numbers that it is necessary to respond. No other reason for RINOs than political expediency.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer "Present" or "Not guilty."- Theodore Roosevelt
Thanks for posting this. This article is going to be one of those things that will come up in a conversation and the person will simply not believe it was said by an elected republican Senator.
Senator Martinez is an ignoramus when it comes to the law.
Martinez is a ass-kissing tool.
Problem is ... the GOP is full of them.
Strange.. the US Senate didn’t consider the issue preposterous in SR 511 where they ‘sensed’ that McCain was eligible this last April based on his bith certificate.
They can worry, but we can’t?
Are you not?
I just sent him a copy of his answer to you!!
I also sent him explanation from the Constitutions "Grandfather" clause that he conveniently left out in the answer. I also challenged him about he took an Oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, the whole Constitution and not only partly. I told he would be an enabler of a Constitutional crises of the proportion this nation never seen before!!!
Well said on all counts.
I too held my nose and voted for McLame the RINO but I will never again vote for the lesser of two evils.
Either a REAL conservative Republican or no vote.
And NO MORE MONEY FOR THE PARTY til they act like conservatives.
You're caught with your pants down.
..... we have to realize that radio talkers are just that, talkers.
So, Limbaugh is a talker, eh? He's causing the 0ba-mites and the left a lot of grief because he can't be refuted.
Get with your buddies and try the Fairness Doctrine. You won't hear the end of it, I promise.
Scram! Just do it!
Thanks for that catch, melancholy!
Good one.
You’re welcome.
We’ll see if the person takes the trolley bus from the station, right around the corner from here.
Since Obama’s mother was a naturalized citizen (a native of Kansas) and because Obama was himself born on U.S. soil in Hawaii (a U.S. state as of 1958), why are we still having this conversation?
You’re talking about semantics. Take “semantics” up with the constituency in So.Fla.
Well, the Roberts/Scalia/Thomas SCOTUS tossed the case. I hope this puts the matter at rest...because there are much more serious issues to discuss.
The Supreme Court Docket link does not say that. The only case denied today concerning the constitutional issue is the Donofrio case. The Wrotnowski case is pending and goes to Conference before the full Court this comig Friday. Two other cases are pending and another new one was filed today. Go the the Donofrio web site, and things are updated straight from the SC and not a blog. Have a great evening.:)
Arnold Schwarzenegger just took notice.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.