[refermech]

The brother???

[TheZMan]

*popcorn*

[WheresMyBailout]

I’m guessing all 9, including Scalia.

[SuperLuminal]

Nice summary, IAC.

[blaquebyrd]

I call BS on her story. She states, "I gave him the books to sign and asked, 'Tell me what to do, what can I do, those soldiers [her plaintiffs] can be court-martialed for asking a legitimate question, who is the president, is he legitimate.' He said, 'Bring the case, I'll hear it, I don't know about others.'"

I can't imagine a US Supreme Court Justice dispensing legal advice advice to a potential plaintiff at his book signing. He has to know that this very act would be used against him as a conflict of interest. Furthermore what type of lawyer would publicize this info knowing at the very least it could be used as grounds for recusal. To believe her story is to believe Scalia to be an incompetent justice who decides which cases to hear from customers at a book signing.

[stockpirate]

ping to A good one

[Erskine Childers]

I think that SCOTUS would rule, if they ever took the case, that they lack jurisdiction as POTUS qualifications under the Constitution are a “political question.” That’s the kind of issue that the Constitution gives over wholly to other branches of government. There was a famous case in the 1960s that I recall from law school where a group of draftees argued that the draft was unconstitutional since it constituted “involutary servitude.” SCOTUS refused to take the case since the war powers were given over to Congress and POTUS.

I think it’s not a bad argument. Let’s say that it can be proved that Barry was born in Kenya. Why is it up to SCOTUS now to do anything about it? Elections are to be run by federal, state and local officials. There were plenty of opportunities to file a complaint in all 50 states and with the Feds. It seems to me that SCOTUS could rule here that it’s really not up to them to decide the issue.

[Don Corleone]

Nine black robed COWARDS!!!!!

[usshadley]

bttt

[KarenMarie]

mark

[kellynla]

BTTT

[Reeses]

Is a President Biden an improvement?

[surfer]

fix is in...corruption is widespread regardless of party...

[DustyMoment]

The list of cases that the SCOTUS has denied related to the eligibility of Obama to be president is both discouraging and enlightening. It strongly suggests that there is a lot of political influence pressuring the Court to deny the case. This is problematic because the Court is supposed to be an apolitical body that rules solely on the basis of the Constitution and case law.

For the SCOTUS to deny a case (as it has in many cases involving Obama’s eligibility) on the grounds that the plaintiff has no standing to bring suit is troubling. Establishing Obama’s eligibility to be POTUS is a fundamental function of the Court and ANY American citizen should have standing to bring the case before the SCOTUS.

If Obama is eventually proven to not be eligible to be president, IMO, the backlash will be severe. The DNC will have been proven to have acted against the best interests of and the laws of the United States. In addition, by not pursuing this issue to resolution, the Congress will be held complicit in refusing to address the issue and the Democrat party will have placed itself and its future as a major political party into the mud.

This is not going to go away anytime soon.

[Dajjal]

obumpa

[KarenMarie]

I am no lawyer by any stretch but I gotta call shens on this one.

I cannot see a long serving, seasoned member of SCOTUS discussing this in the first place, never mind offering advice on how to get the case heard.

I am kinda xurious as to where the eligibility issue goes but somehow this story just has a funny smell to it.

[real_patriotic_american]

This case will start opening up. The media can only ignore it for so long.