It can’t be settled. It’s never been ruled on.
.
Silly comment!
Congress has the power to define that upon which the court may act.
Acts of congress are settled law, until they are changed by another congress.
Exactly. Freepers can have 2,000-post threads debating it but in the end it’s not decided until we have a court ruling, since they are the ones authorized to interpret the Constitution.
This HAS to be dealt with.
I wasn’t aware that there are challenges to Rubio’s eligibility also. I said the dems haven’t threatened to sue if Rubio is the nominee but I just might not have heard about it. Have the dems said anything about that?
Two of the top 3 R candidates could conceivably be taken out by a judge - either ruling accurately or being bought off - if they are the R candidate, thereby shoeing in the dem candidate.
This HAS to be dealt with, because as long as judges can be bought (as the dems have a history of doing), it doesn’t even matter what the Constitution truly means. It only matters that if either of these guys is nominnated the dems will have an Achilles’ heel with which to disqualify the R candidate.
Congress hasn’t defined it either