Since the AJC was predictably content-free, can anyone describe the challengers’ legal argument? Are Georgia election officials compelled by law to consider substantive (Constitutional or statutory) requirements for office, and keep substantively disqualified candidates off the ballot? Or can they act as a mere clerk, monitoring perfunctory tasks (submittal of x forms and y petitions by a due date)?
One hopes Mr. Hatfield can cite numerous precedents wherein Georgia election officials have denied ballot access due to candidates’ failures to meet statutory requirements for office (e.g., for minimum age requirements). But to succeed, he must make an escape-proof case for compulsory “substantive qualification.” Even if you force election officials to examine real qualifications, they can still declare forged documents to be genuine, or accept watered-down definitions of natural-born citizen. Hard to win a crooked game.
These are unfortunately often political decisions determined by the party of the secretary of the 50 respective states.
In Cal they have previously asked for birth certificates to,determine the age of candidates I believe Eldridge Cleaver was excluded because he did not meet the constitutional age for president.
The SofS for Cal was contacted by many citizens who challenged Obama’s qualification based upon place of birth, but she refused to ask for proof of birth location. She is a democrat.