Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Usagi_yo

You’re still not getting it. The court has the power to resolve controversies that arise under the Constitution. Eligibility certainly falls with the scope of such a controversy. This isn’t the same as impeachment. The stuff about Congress certifying the electoral vote does NOT resolve whether or not Obama meets Article II eligibility. Second, Congress is not given a specified power to be the so-called “arbiters of eligibility.” It would be a conflict of interest because a partisan Congress can simply ignore the issue (which is what has happened anyway). It still does NOT take away the court’s Constitutional power to resolve controversies that arise under the Constitution. A de facto officer can be removed for being ineligible. It’s not an impeachment but more of an annulment.


41 posted on 10/07/2012 7:59:10 PM PDT by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]


To: edge919

I get it, you don’t.

This isn’t under the Constitution, this is the Constitution
Article 2 section 4. Besides, there is always that pesky Marbury V. Madison.

The court has no power to remove the President. The court can find anything it wants about the president, whether he’s a serial pediophile or ineligible, but only congress can remove him.

De facto vs De Jure, I told you to look it up.

Yes, politics is partisan and they certainly can and have had problems Yes, the House elected a President twice. Thomas Jefferson in 1801 and in 1825 it elected John Quincy Adams

Conflict of interest because they can ignore the issue? — A laughable assertion since it is Congress’s prerogative to act. This is done via Vote and articles of impeachment.

What are your plans? Sue Congress because they won’t impeach the President? Make the SCOTUS issue a writ of Mandamus to compel Congress to impeach the President? Because that is in a nutshell what your argument is, it’s so preposterous that it’s been laughed out of court, laughed at in public and has aided the opposition in belittling the eligibility argument to the point that NO CREDIBLE action will ever take place.

There are 50 Secretary’s of States that have determined Obama’s eligibility — Who are you to say otherwise.

Read Marbury V. Madison and find out for yourself what the court thinks of your type of arguments.


42 posted on 10/07/2012 10:46:39 PM PDT by Usagi_yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson