[Mr Rogers]

Suppose someone who was 30 years old ran. You don’t think anyone would challenge his eligibility? Or that the courts would rule he’s eligible if the voters want him?

It is perfectly reasonable to sue to prevent someone ineligible from being listed on a ballot. You will notice that courts HAVE ruled on Obama & McCain...

[Tau Food]

If a 30 year old ran, he would be rejected by the voters and their electors. If you say, "How can we be sure that voters and electors will follow the law regarding the candidate's eligibility?" my response would be, "How can you be sure that some judge or group of judges will follow the law regarding the candidate's eligibility?" Obviously, that candidate to succeed would have to put together some kind of evidence that he was 35 to gain any kind of financial or public support.

A jury can render a verdict of not guilty in a case where the defendant confesses his guilt and both he and his attorney argue that the jury should find him guilty. All of our judges and the Supreme Court cannot change that verdict to guilty. Why? Because under our Constitution, the jury is the empowered to decide the guilt issue, even if they make a mistake.

Our Constitution states that the Senate shall render the verdict in the impeachment of a president. The Supreme Court would not be authorized to set aside the not guilty verdict of the Senate even if the Supreme Court believed that most of the Senators were mistaken in their view of what constitutes a high crime or misdemeanor.

If a president vetoes a law and states that he is doing so because he believes it to be unconstitutional, the Supreme Court cannot reverse his veto, even if the Supreme Court is convinced that the president was mistaken in his opinion that the law to be unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court is not the only decision-maker in our system. Their job is not to ensure that no one else ever makes a mistake.

I could someday be proven wrong, but i don't think I will live to see the day when the Supreme Court intervenes to prevent a candidate from running for office because the Supreme Court believes the candidate to be unqualified.

We'll just have to wait and see, I guess, but I believe that the Constitution pretty clearly commits to the voters and their electors the job of selecting a president.