AMICUS BRIEF-Georgia POTUS Eligibility Cases

http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2012/01/23/amicus-brief-georgia-potus-eligibility-cases/ ^ | Jan 23, 2012 | Leo Donofrio

[esquirette]

This could end up to be a very good states’ rights case.

[4Zoltan]

“However, when one looks beneath the surface more is revealed about just how different they are.”

There certainly is the conceptual difference between the two. But I suspect that would not matter to someone like Justice Scalia.

“What I look for in the Constitution is precisely what I look for in a statute: the original meaning of the text, not what the original draftsmen intended” (A Matter of Interpretation, Federal Courts and the Law, 1997)

And

“In interpreting this text, we are guided by the principle that “[t]he Constitution was written to be understood by the voters; its words and phrases were used in their normal and ordinary as distinguished from technical meaning.” . . . Normal meaning may of course include an idiomatic meaning, but it excludes secret or technical meanings that would not have been known to ordinary citizens in the founding generation” District of Columbia v. Heller

So my guess is he would ignore much of Leo’s analysis of the Calvin’s Case and the derivation of the terms.

[Marine_Uncle]

Thanks for the ping. I’ll download it.

[Danae]

Well, something tells me that we might just find that out one way or another.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!