[frog in a pot]

Thanks for the link, Mike.

Shooter points out:
The Constitution specifies no process for certifying presidential qualifications.

That may be correct.
However, 3 USC 15 most certainly does. The blatant disregard of that statute by the Congress during the 2009 Joint Session, most particularly in the face of the public's outcry over O's eligibility, was a failure of each member to defend the Constitution. That charge especially applies to the Republican members.

The burden of proof has always been on Obama, but someone has to request he submit that proof. The Joint Session was the time and place.

[swain_forkbeard]

I just reviewed 3 USC 15. Interesting stuff. But I don’t see that it speaks to Presidential qualifications. I do see that it allows for members of the Senate or the House to object to the recording of electoral votes from any given State. But nobody did that when they had the chance.

Even if someone does that, it just goes to the Senate or House to be sorted out. And how would they do that? What standard or process would they use to determine if a candidate was qualified? What definition of natural born would they use? The issue might get to the House or Senate, but we’d be right back where we started. With no clearly defined process, standard, or definition.

So what did I miss?

[Uncle Sham]

"The burden of proof has always been on Obama, but someone has to request he submit that proof. The Joint Session was the time and place"

See post 89 and link.