No he doesn't. Obama's legal team has until December 1st to respond to Berg's suit. Their response will no doubt be a carbon copy of their response to the lower court suit - frivilous, lacks standing, so forth. Then Berg will respond to their response, and so forth and so on. Then the Supreme Court will dismiss it.
My guess is the petition for a writ of certiori will be denied. The petitioner lacks standing. I also believe that it is not a justiciable matter. It is a political question. Only the Congress "qualifies" someone to be president. It is the first order of business when the new Congress convenes in January.
The case also fails on account of ripeness. Barack Obama was not elected president on November 4th. Only electors were chosen on November 4th. And the electors have not yet selected the next president. They convene in 51 separate "colleges" next month to cast their ballots. We won't know "oficial" results until January when the new Congress convenes in joint session and receives the electoral college certificates. At that point it takes the objection of at least one Senator and one member of the House of Representatives for the Congress to bring the matter to debate. The vote of the Congress is final. There is no role for the Supreme Court to intervene.(Just as the Supreme Court could not review a impeachment.)
yes - trust me this could go on for years.
this is the way our wonderful legal system is designed - to make lawyers money while delivering no justice.
If Obama is somehow disqualified after the Electors cast their votes, then the votes for him would be invalid. Since John McCain didn’t get a majority, then the House of Representatives would have to decide the election.
Here’s the kicker: Amendment 12 says that when the House decides an election, they muct decide it from the candidates who receieve electoral votes, with a maximum of three candidates. In other words, the House cannot insert its own candidate. If all of the Democratic Electors vote for Obama, and all the GOP Electors vote for McCain, then when the House decides, McCain will be the only name on the ballot. The result: a McCain-Biden Administration.
Now, there could be some question inregards to Amendment 20. Joe Biden and the Democrats could claim that Obama became President-elect when the Electors cast their votes. Since he was disqualied, under Amendment 20, Joe Biden becomes President. He would then appoint a Vice-President.
But that having been said, I find it odd that they would hear the Cert at all~!? It is unusual to say the least to have the Cert docketed at all if they have no issue to determine. Now I wouldn't read too much into this (like they are about to make an earth-shattering decision) but it is curious to say the least.
The only reason I can imagine that they are reviewing it is to make a final decision on standing. They aren't really bound by precedent, and the mechanism of electing the President is so different than when the Constitution was written they could consider the role of the voter to have more standing (?) I know I'm reaching here, but does anyone else have a clue why they SCOTUS would review this decision?
That having been said, I don't appreciate whoever originally started this frivolous rumor about having to produce a birth certificate. I had an email exchange with Berg and it definitely wasn't him or his people. You will notice that after my email with him he had it put up on obamacrimes.com that this rumor was patently false. Let's get out the popcorn and see what the SCOTUS does.