[RightOnTheLeftCoast]

"It seems to me it’s the straw that will break the Constitution’s back."

Ship has sailed. Making the birth circumstances of the President a don't-care is just the cherry on top of an constitution-shredding parfait whipped up from things as varied as the income tax, the War on Drugs, asset forfeiture, direct election of Senators, etc etc etc.

I do wish as many people were talking about Obama's socialism, but I guess we live in a gimme-gimme era of abject barking stupidity.

[mlo]

"Ship has sailed. Making the birth circumstances of the President a don't-care is just the cherry on top of an constitution-shredding parfait whipped up from things as varied as the income tax, the War on Drugs, asset forfeiture, direct election of Senators, etc etc etc."

I agree that parts of the constitution are routinely ignored, and have been for a long time. But Obama's qualification isn't one of them, and the income tax and direct election of senators (neither of which I like) were enacted by constitutional ammendment, so they are constitutional.

[Kevmo]

Ship has sailed. Making the birth circumstances of the President a don’t-care is just the cherry on top of an constitution-shredding parfait whipped up from things as varied as the income tax, the War on Drugs, asset forfeiture, direct election of Senators, etc etc etc.
***Interesting point, but there has never been a case as stark as this before the SCOTUS with respect to eligibility. Other cases where SCOTUS shreds the constitution were Dred Scott, Roe v Wade, Kelo, Separation of Church & State (you won’t find that in the constitution), and like you say, etc. etc. I perceive that this case will be the threshold event that historians look back at and say, “from this point onward, America was no longer a constitutional republic but rather an empire”, just like when Caesar crossed the Rubicon.