[TLI]

Todays Chicago Tribune article regarding Hussein the Magnificent resisting demands from the American people to produce a NON-forged BC has over 800 comments.

Eight HUNDRED.

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in Pakistan… zero

Zimbabwe declared a national emergency over a cholera epidemic… zero

Iraq's approval of a security pact that sets a three-year timeframe for U.S. troops to leave… 2 comments.

The way I see this thing is the Supreme Court has exactly two options. Take the case and risk having the “minority population” burn down the neighborhoods they live in

…or…

not take the case and incur a total constitutional meltdown and possible nationwide internal war.

I’m thinking the Supremes had DAMN well better take the case and conduct a full investigation.

[gathersnomoss]

“I’m thinking the Supremes had DAMN well better take the case and conduct a full investigation.”

Aerosmith....”Dream On”....Sorry, it ain't happening. My blood pressure has come waaay down since I “got” that “the fix is in”.

[onedoug]

...Or let it wait until whatever forces make it an issue, then he’s just out...disqualified. No impeachment. Nothing. Just out.

[Wally_Kalbacken]

I’m thinking the Supremes had DAMN well better take the case and conduct a full investigation.

This shows the typical misunderstanding of the Supreme Court, how it functions and what powers it has. It's part of the reason this matter is getting such attention in this forum, and I have to tell you, with regret, it's an entire waste of time.

1. The Supreme Court articulates power precisely by refusing to hear certain cases. Numerous doctrines apply to restrict the controversies that the Supreme Court will hear (jurisdiction, standing, ripeness, mootness, etc.).
2. Certiorari is not a right - the vast majority of cases arrive at the Supreme Court by application, and then the justices vote to hear or not hear those that apply. They may comment when they turn down a case, they may not.
3. The Supreme Court has no apparatus for implementation or enforcement, no power and no authority to investigate anything. It decides cases and controversies, when they fit the conservative and limiting doctrines which define what they will hear.
4. The Constitution specifies a very limited set of qualifications for national offices - but does not fix the responsibility for evaluating the qualification for office of candidates (or the elected, but not yet seated or inaugurated) in any part of the government. The drafters couldn't anticipate every circumstance - this is one they couldn't foresee.
5. Some problems do not have legal solutions. This is likely to be one of them. Once in office, Impeachment is the only way to remove a President. With significant Democratic majorities in both bodies, that's a non-starter.
6. There is no precedential experience to look to in this kind of conundrum.