A law enforcement officer told me he would refer the case resulting from my complaint to the state attorney general, and his chief told him that he couldn’t. No reason given as to why.
Where in the Constitution does it say that a person can “act as President” as long as 4 specific laypersons (non-judicial) say it’s OK with them? How do those 4 people alone have the job of protecting the entire country from someone who is not eligible to the office of the Presidency? There is no reward for being President-elect so how would any of those 4 people experience real harm before the President-elect actually became the President? If “standing” is required, there would never be a moment in time when a person had standing to PREVENT an ineligible President-elect from taking office.
In Roe v Wade the Supreme Court took the extraordinary step of hearing a case even after it was too late to do any “good” (cough) for the plaintiff. The appeals took too long, so that by the time the Supreme Court heard the case, it was no longer a case. There was nobody with standing, because “Roe” had already given birth to her baby and there was nothing justiciable. The Supreme Court heard the non-case anyway because it was a CONTROVERSY which impacted many women, none of whom would ever be able to reach the Supreme Court with a case still existing. The precedent is set, that a “controversy” does not require there to be a justiciable case, if it is impossible for a justiciable case to still exist at the time the Supreme Court would have to decide the case.
Furthermore, class action lawsuits take place all the time.
And cases have been filed where standing was automatically granted (such as in the ballot challenges) but the judges threw out the challenges without ever applying the Federal Rules of Evidence. Rule by fiat. It’s contagious; spread by the barrel of a gun I suspect.
An opposing candidate makes the strongest case for granting standing in an election eligibility lawsuit. The first thing a judge is going to think is “where’s the guy or gal that lost?”
What crime did you allege that Barack Obama committed in your state that is a violation of your state’s laws? It is always best to file a criminal complaint in the jurisdiction where the crime occurred. There should be criminal complaints filed in every state of the union plus the District of Columbia. That might shake loose a grand jury investigation (which was the way Whitewater started under Clinton) or even a congressional investigation in the House. My hope was always that Sheriff Arpaio would turn over the Cold Case Posse evidence to the Maricopa County Attorney but that has not happened in time to stop Obama’s coronation.
Hundreds, thousands, even millions of co-plaintiffs can join any civil suit in a class action but the strongest case will always be with a lead plaintiff who can show direct and particularized harm. Would you grant standing to a pharmaceutical damage suit that had no plaintiff who had suffered direct injury from the side effects of the drug?
In one of the earliest eligibility lawsuits, US District Court Judge Carter contemplated granting standing to Allan Keyes, candidate of the American Independent Party but Judge Carter ultimately didn’t because Keyes was only on the ballot in four or five states and had no chance to be harmed by being denied a serious opportunity to be elected.
The first 2008 presidential eligibility lawsuit to be dismissed for lack of standing was Hollister v McCain and the Republican National Committee. That suit was filed at the time of the 2008 New Hampshire Primary. It challenged McCain’s eligibility due to his birth outside the US. McCain’s and the RNC’s attorneys got the lawsuit dismissed for lack of standing by Fred Hollister. If Newt Gingrich or Ron Paul or one of the other Republican primary candidates had been a plaintiff along with Mr, Hollister, the lawsuit might have had a much better chance of being heard in full court.
If 40 people had received electoral votes, then that number would have the strongest case to be granted standing. However after the first twenty or so Obama and Mc Cain eligibility lawsuits were dismissed for lack of standing, and both liberal and conservative judges were granting those dismissals, it would have been a good idea to try to enlist one of the major party candidates as a lead plaintiff to make the strongest possible case for being granted standing. You are correct that any judge can grant standing if they are so inclined. The reality is that only a few have, except for in the state ballot challenges where most states’ laws allow any registered voter to file a challenge. There were 50 of those lawsuits in 2012 and none were dismissed on standing grounds.
The Constitution is very precise: (12th Amendment), whoever receives a majority of the votes of the Electors “shall be the president.” There is a constitutional check on the electors, the votes of the electors can be challenged in Congress by any one Representative and any one Senator, but in Obama’s case, there were no challenges from any member of Congress in 2008 or in 2012.