Voici l’impasse. IMHO, there is no way the Supreme Court should not or cannot answer a question posed by 20 million voters, particularly if they can do so without undoing the electoral will of that 69,456,897.
In other words, Wong Kim Ark, et al will be revisited for needed clarification after the fool wished upon us by the aforementioned 69.5 Million voters leaves office.
In my humble opinion, if ever an issue falls under the “political question” category of Article III standing, this is it. Nowhere in the Constitution is the judiciary granted the power to remove a sitting president from office whether it is Obama or someone else. That power is reserved for Congress via impeachment, trial in the Senate and conviction for high crimes and misdemeanors. And nowhere in the Constitution does the word “parents” appear.
It is the responsibility of the Chief Elections Official (usually an elected Secretary of State) in the 50 states plus the District of Columbia to determine whether a candidate is eligible or not to be on a state’s ballot.
Also it is the responsiblity of the Congress meeting in joint session as required by the Twelfth Amendment to submit written challenges to the certification of the electoral college votes of any candidate who might be ineligible. Two such written challenges triggers an immediate investigation by each House of Congress into the validity of the challenge.
It is possible that a judicial ruling on the issue of whether a president-elect has not “qualified” for the office of the presidency under the provisions of the 20th Amendment might reach the Supreme Court.
(I)It is the responsibility of the Chief Elections Official (usually an elected Secretary of State) in the 50 states plus the District of Columbia to determine whether a candidate is eligible or not to be on a state’s ballot.
(II)Also it is the responsiblity of the Congress meeting in joint session as required by the Twelfth Amendment to submit written challenges to the certification of the electoral college votes of any candidate who might be ineligible. Two such written challenges triggers an immediate investigation by each House of Congress into the validity of the challenge.
(III) It is possible that a judicial ruling on the issue of whether a president-elect has not “qualified” for the office of the presidency under the provisions of the 20th Amendment might reach the Supreme Court.
Well Jamese, "they" say "...and the truth shall set you free."
What "they" always neglect to mention is that telling unpleasant truths can get you in a heap'o'trouble on a conservative site!
However, reluctant Birther, and hardened "Natural Borner" that I am, I must commend you for cutting to the chase (mit das unverzeihliche schadenfreude übersetzung für) on these controversial issues.
There is some scant hope for my team on (III) above, but as I very reluctantly have come to realize, not while the present recumbent POTUS occupies government housing. I recommend division of labor. Us on the wimps in the House. Donofrio, Apuzzo, and Hemenway in the Courts.