“Objections to electoral votes are the basis of the counting of votes, not constitutional eligibility.”
__
I understand that’s your position, but the report says something quite different. I quoted it above, and I will quote part of it again. It makes it perfectly clear that, in 2008, the power to object on the grounds of eligibility was not exercised:
“It appears from the record that no Member of the House or Senate of the 111th Congress, in joint session for the purpose of counting and certifying the electoral vote, raised or forwarded any objection to the electoral votes of (then) President-elect Obama on the grounds of qualifications, or otherwise.”
link to Short guide to counting electoral votes
Notice that nothing here address presidential eligibility but only the electoral votes themselves.
That is a statement of fact, not of law.
It is also clear that no housewife handcuffed Obama and carried him to the nuthouse. Therefore, because I noted that fact, housewives MUST have the legal authority to handcuff Obama and carry him to the nuthouse?
That conclusion would be unsupported.
The CRS said the authority to vet the Presidential eligibility belongs to the states, as edge919 pointed out.
Once the states are done and Congress has certified the official tally of electoral votes and declared the electoral winner, there is STILL one more eligibility step before the President elect can assume the duties and powers of the presidency. Between the electoral certification and Jan 20th, if it hasn’t already been done, the President elect needs to “qualify”.
Congress and the states are already done with their chapter in the saga; at that point it’s just the candidate and the Constitution, with no body or branch designated as the determiner of whether the Pres elect “qualified”. In Constitutional terms, then, Article III says that the federal judiciary has the responsibility of deciding all cases that arise from the Constitution or laws. Multiple cases were brought forward, at all points in the process - beginning before Obama was even the DNC candidate and continuing even now.
The issue of interpreting the 20th Amendment and applying it to the 2008 presidential election is not, in any way, shape, or form, a political question. There is no body or branch of government other than the federal judiciary which is given even the AUTHORITY to decide this issue, much less the actual, expressed RESPONSIBILITY to decide it.