Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Cboldt; xzins

I appreciate the fact- and logic-based debate between you guys. This is the kind of back and forth that is supposed to happen when a case is argued. It is way past time for the case to be argued where it’s SUPPOSED to be argued: in a legally-binding court.

We’d STILL be arguing about hanging chads if the courts had not done their duty in 2000. And the country would be divided worse than the Hatfields and McCoys after going that long with 2 groups duking it out in forums but nobody having standing to get a LEGAL resolution. We cannot allow the courts to keep claiming that none of us has standing to get LEGAL resolution of a controversy before it tears a nation apart. There is one way for we the people to get a class-action suit before the courts that requires a judicial response: through the actions of a State.

Is there any good reason for us not to do this through our state legislatures?


693 posted on 10/31/2013 6:08:06 AM PDT by butterdezillion (Free online faxing at http://faxzero.com/ Fax all your elected officials. Make DC listen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 690 | View Replies ]


To: butterdezillion
Is there any good reason for us not to do this through our state legislatures?

You know, I have thought about that. What would happen if a state legislature defined "natural born citizen"? Obviously, it would only apply to their state, but wouldn't it have to be upheld in other states under the 14th amendment.

696 posted on 10/31/2013 6:19:09 AM PDT by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 693 | View Replies ]

To: butterdezillion
-- Is there any good reason for us not to do this through our state legislatures? --

As long as you don't hang much hope on the effort, there's good reason to get the states to clarify the criteria and means (show of evidence) to qualify for being named on the electoral ballot.

I'm of a mind that there will be lawsuits whether or not there is a state statute that purports to define natural born citizen, and the lawsuits will make claims about what constitutes qualification. There were suits against McCain, and those would be a good point for review.

I can picture the Senate passing a resolution as it did for McCain. Has no binding value in Court, but it shows that there is no opposition in the Senate should that person win the electoral college.

I'm also of a mind that SCOTUS won't touch the issue unless and until Congress finds that a person openly known and admitted to be born off of US soil is qualified to be president. IOW, there can be a thousand lawsuits in lower courts, and SCOTUS will brush them off as not ripe (see McCain suits). How they act if Cruz is elected is a crap shoot. They may find the matter not-judiciable (see Marbury v. Madison for a sort of parallel - Court said Marbury was right, but the Court lacked jurisdiction) or a political question.

699 posted on 10/31/2013 6:41:49 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 693 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson