[El Gato]

Personally, I was and continue to be in the camp that his eligibility to be president is still questionable, even if he was born in HI. But, SCOUTS disagrees with me, and has signaled that they have no appetite to entertain such challenges - disappointing.

When did they disagree? I'm not aware of any ruling on the parameters of "natural born citizen" as regards to Art. I Section 2 eligibility. It's just never come up before.

But about their appetite, I tend to agree.

[OldDeckHand]

"When did they disagree? I'm not aware of any ruling on the parameters of "natural born citizen" as regards to Art. I Section 2 eligibility. It's just never come up before."

I was referring (implicitly) to the Donofrio v. Wells case and SCOTUS's refusal to grant cert, without comment. The substance of Donofrio's case, as I'm sure you are aware, has nothing to do with his place of birth - in fact, I believe he stipulates that it's HI - and everything to do with the "natural born" clause.

But, you're right insomuch that this "natural born" citizen clause and it's contemporary relevance to presidential eligibility has never been fully - or even partially - litigated. It doesn't appear that's going to change in the foreseeable future.