I have three questions for you and would appreciate hearing your opinion. Actually I would like anyone to weigh in if they can answer my questions or give their opinions.
We will know Monday whether the Justices will hear Cort’s case. Do you think it is possible that the SC Justices will consider joining the cases together and hear them AFTER the Electoral College vote due to the fact that Obama will not actually BE “President-Elect” until AFTER the vote on Monday?
I understand that a Judge in the Washington State SC has decided to hear a case. (I hope what I heard is correct.)
Is it possible for the Washington Supreme Court Judge to issue a stay in that State’s Electoral College vote on Monday?
The Electoral College meet at each state capital to cast their votes on Monday. If one or more Electoral College members of a particular state raise the question of constitutional qualifications, does that state Electoral College group have to resolve the issue before casting their votes?
I'm not a constitutional lawyer, but unless it is a class-action suit, court protocol dictates that each case be heard separately, even if the cases seem to be parallel.
Each case has to be judged individually, but that does not mean everyone gets equal time.
For example, if the SCOTUS issues a ruling on a case to which there are parallel cases to be heard after the ruling is issued, then they would issue a summary judgment based on the prescident set by the previous case and ruling.
Although this is an unprescidented issue where the there are challenges to the Constitutional qualifications of a candidate for President selected during the general election to serve as POTUS, the issue of who has standing to challenge an election result is an issue that has been previously resolved. Berg's suit was dismissed for that reason, even though the case is unique and the circumstances surrounding it are unlike any other challenge ever heard by the court.
There were challenges made to McCain's citizenship status during the campaign that were quickly resolved when he presented his genuine, original birth certificates, and the Senate passed a resolution to confirm his natural-born status.
McCain's situation is totally different from Obama, because Obama still has not presented any valid evidence that would positively confirm where, when, or to whom he was born, and, added to that deficit is the fact that his mother (the only parent with US citizenship) could not confer her citizenship at birth, according to the prevailing US Statutes at the time.
McCain, on the other hand, was born to two US citizens at an American Naval base in the Panama Canal Zone, and the intent of Article II was not to penalize a child born to US citizens who, because of one or more them had no choice but to serve our country in the military overseas.
But, like i said, that's why this matter is going to the highest court in the land.