Posted on 12/15/2008 7:17:59 AM PST by unspun
McCAIN WINS BALLOT ACCESS LAWSUIT
On September 16, U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup ruled that John McCain should be on the California ballot. Robinson v Bowen, C08-3836, n.d. The plaintiff, a presidential elector candidate for Alan Keyes, had argued that McCain is not "natural-born". Judge Alsup said that McCain is "natural-born." He also said that even if a candidate does not meet the constitutional qualifications to be president, he or she should still be on the ballot.
Every time a minor party presidential candidate who does not meet the constitutional qualifications to be president tries to get on the ballot, and the matter goes to court, courts rule that the candidate should not be on the ballot. The two leading cases are Cleaver v Jordan, in which the California Supreme Court said that Eldridge Cleaver should not be on the 1968 California ballot, and Jenness v Brown, in which a U.S. District Court in Ohio said that Linda Jenness (Socialist Workers Party presidential candidate in 1972) should not be on the ballot. Both Cleaver and Jenness were under age 35. Unfortunately, neither decision is reported, although the briefs in Robinson v Bowen cited the Cleaver case.
Judge Alsup wrote, "Mechanisms exist under the Twelfth Amendment and 3 U.S.C. 15 for any challenge to any candidate to be ventilated when electoral votes are counted, and the Twentieth Amendment provides guidance regarding how to proceed if a president elect shall have failed to qualify. Issues regarding qualifications or lack thereof can be laid before the voting public before the election and, once the election is over, can be raised as objections as the electoral votes are counted in Congress. Therefore, this order holds that the challenge presented by plaintiff is committed under the Constitution to the electors and the legislative branch, at least in the first instance. Judicial review � if any � should occur only after the electoral and Congressional processes have run their course."
The party that most often nominates a presidential candidate, or a vice-presidential candidate, who does not meet the Constitutional qualifications, is the Socialist Workers Party, which has done this in 1972, 1980, 2004, and 2008. Each time the party used a stand-in who did meet the Constitutional qualifications (but only in those states which refuse to print an unqualified presidential candidate on the ballot). Each time except 1972, the party did not fight in court to place its actual nominee on the ballot. Perhaps, if the SWP or any other party nominates someone in 2012 who doesn't meet the Constitutional qualifications, the party can raise the issue in court again, this time depending on the Robinson v McCain precedent.
Yes, we have been betrayed by men… church-wise in the 60’s and maybe tomorrow, civil-wise by the SCOTUS;
Hell man, do you think you are any more protected from betrayal than our Saviour… take a long look at a crucifix… and remember his best friend Peter?
The only thing within your power is you… don’t betray yourself… know you are fighting the good fight and will continue to fight until you have satisfied yourself that you have done all that you can do to right the wrong… understand this…
if the case fails tomorrow that is not because you didn’t fight … if it dies tomorrow and you fail to continue to fight … you must answer to yourself and all those who have given their life to protect the constitution.
Oh you of little faith; so gifted in knowledge and talent to express your thoughts.
You have but to ask yourself have I done the best I could have done? … is there anything more I can do?
Perhaps the electoral must vote as directed in the following:
http://www.ballot-access.org/2008/100108.html#5
Judge Alsup wrote, “Mechanisms exist under the Twelfth Amendment and 3 U.S.C. 15 for any challenge to any candidate to be ventilated when electoral votes are counted, and the Twentieth Amendment provides guidance regarding how to proceed if a president elect shall have failed to qualify. Issues regarding qualifications or lack thereof can be laid before the voting public before the election and, once the election is over, can be raised as objections as the electoral votes are counted in Congress. Therefore, this order holds that the challenge presented by plaintiff is committed under the Constitution to the electors and the legislative branch, at least in the first instance. Judicial review � if any � should occur only after the electoral and Congressional processes have run their course.” Timing is everything… you maybe the only one able to raise an “objection”
Pity-party is over.
Regardless of what they say… you and I will Know the truth …and that makes all the difference.
You will call upon your Ancestors, for at this moment, YOU are the sole reason for Their existence.
[Ed. Monday December 15...RIP Constitution]
Star, Lucy, MHG:
Please ping your lists (my ping list for this is v. short). Need some attorneying!
‘Splain it to me Lucy!
McCain was born in the Canal Zone, which was a U.S. Territory until that fool Jimmy Carter gave the Panama Canal to the nation of Panama. I believe McCain was born at a U.S. Naval installation in the Canal Zone, the son of a high-ranking Naval officer who was serving in the Canal Zone at the time of McCain’s birth. For anyone to say that McCain is not a U.S. citizen is absurd.
Nope, he was born in the country of Panama itself outside of U.S. Territorial control.
But that is irrelevant as he was born to a mother who is a Natural Born Citizen and that in and of itself makes him a Natural Born Citizen.
This ruling is saying that there is no cause for judicial review in the process, unless and until the process actually elects an unqualified President, and that prior to this there are mechanisms in place via voters, electors and Congress.
“‘Splain it to me Lucy!”
Will assume your plea is in jest and also ask Lucy to forgive me for jumping in before her response (if I do!).
The words by the court:
“Judicial review ‘if any’ should occur only after the electoral and Congressional processes have run their course.”
is the view most of us usually think most appropriate.
In general, we should not ask unelected judges to jump in and sort out disputes when our elected politicians have clearly set out the remedy.
In the cited case, the judge pointed out the precise elements in the remedy for the O qualification controversy.
Please see my About page.
Personally, I don't tend to agree with that, since placing a ficititious candidate, supposedly cleared to run is a violation of the public trust.
But, hey, I've been involved in elections and ballot petitioning in Cook County, IL and candidates are challenged and removed from the ballot all the time. See history of Barack Obama, for example.
What makes this any different?
He was not born in the Canal zone, but as his birth certificate (both short and long form) showed, in Colon, Republic of Panama. He was not born on the Naval base, although his father was stationed and his mother live there.
But he is a natural born citizen because *both* his parents were US Citizens when he was born. Even for one born outside the country, that has been one of the "natural born" criteria since at least 1765, per "Blackstone", and so was within the definition that founders were using when they put the "natural born" requirement into the Constitution.
That alone would not have done it. When the Constitution was written, children born of an alien and citizen parent, outside the country, were only considered "natural born" if the citizen was the father. Most countries, still today, have citizenship at birth go with the parents, regardless of where born, including born in the country in question. However England and many of it's former colonies, including the US, are exceptions were birth in the country, as well as birth to a citizen father or citizen parents (as in McCain's case) makes a child "natural born".
I have met, briefly, a young lady born in Germany but who the Germans and the Turks consider a Turk, and she carries a Turkish passport.
Who cares about RINO McCain. Was Obama brought up in this case?
In the 1890's this was changed to be "a parent". If "a parent" is a Natural Born Citizen, then the child is a Natural Born Citizen. That is why there is no doubt that John McCain is a Natural Born Citizen.
Judicial review allowed only *after* Electoral College votes and Congress certifies?
I would be very interested in seeing some sort of indication, as to what this judge relied upon to determine that John McCain is a natural born citizen, myself. Then, after making this determination, the judge goes on to essentially imply that the election qualification requirement cannot be enforced at the state level anyway. Odd.
John Adams defended the British soldiers in the case of the Boston Massacre, but the Supreme Court of 2008 will have no hearing for Liberty, no mere citizen has standing before it.
“What makes this any different?”
It is not so different unless one asks a federal court to become involved and take action. The federal court could wisely respond: “OK, this dropped through the cracks but we do not need to butt in at this early stage, your Congress has provided the relief you desire, get back to us if the Congress drops the ball”.
And, that is the way we should want it.
The Keyes suit in CA is interesting (at least for a few more days) because Keyes is asking for state action, not federal action. Keyes seems to have standing to confront the CA SOS with a defect that is entirely within CA and one that can be quite easily and timely corrected. In essence, as I read it, Keyes is saying nothing more to the SOS than there is substantial reason to believe O fraudulently certified (with criminal penalties) that he is qualified to appear in CA’s election. He seems to argue the SOS should recognize its statutory duty to assure the candidates are eligible. Keyes is doing no more than asking the SOS to step in and validate that certification pursuant to that duty.
That is just what that case was about (and BTW, we can believe the Democrats were prepared to fight tooth and nail to disqualify McCain -- that is the Obama way).
What matters is finding out what in the world the courts, especially the SCOTUS are thinking here.
Or, "Hack?"
Not to be off topic but MCCain was just on news saying that there are lots of qualified governors like Min Governor Paulenty (sp.) news report said HE WOULD NOT SUPPORT PALIN for PRES. in 2008 :( Just incredible!!!
'At's what I thought you were gonna say, thanks.
(with criminal penalties)
Good and only fitting.
He seems to argue the SOS should recognize its statutory duty to assure the candidates are eligible. Keyes is doing no more than asking the SOS to step in and validate that certification pursuant to that duty.
That is among the actions sought by Donofrio (NJ) and Wrotnowski (CT). It now seems even more significant that the Donofrio case is still pending, thought the request for stay of election was (moot) denied.
I/we now want to see if the Wrotnowski case is still listed in the pending bin.
The problem with that is the lack of available documentation at the time the electoral votes are counted. As I understand it, such challenges must be resolved within two hours. Far to short a time to procure the necessariy documentation. Many of the case in various courts are asking for nothing more than that documentation. How is Congress supposed to decide on any challenge without it?
Of course even with it, the new heavily DemocRat Congress would probably only take about 30 minutes to resolve the challenge. Long enough for the Senate members to retire to their chamber and call the roll, while the House presses their voting buttons. Then we get an Illegal Alien President elect.
The later the truth comes out, if it be that Obama is not eligible, the uglier the resolution will be.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.