Posted on 10/21/2008 1:51:26 PM PDT by A_Niceguy_in_CA
Because of its status as a government entity, the Federal Election Commission was given until today to file an answer to the original complaint filed by attorney Philip Berg on August 21, 2008. This afternoon, the FEC met that deadline when it filed a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, answering Berg's complaint by arguing that he "lacks standing to raise the issue of a candidate's constitutional eligibility."
"Moreover," the motion reads, "even if Berg had standing to raise the constitutional eligibility issue, the Commission should be dismissed as a party to this case because it has no oversight over the Constitution’s Presidential Qualifications Clause."
Benjamin Streeter, the filing attorney from the office of the general counsel for the Federal Election Commission refused to comment. (I felt I should mention it, but please don't read into it too much. Remember that I'm just a regular guy with a political blog, okay? -- Jeff)
Like in the motions to dismiss filed by Barack Obama and the Democratic National Committee, the FEC maintains that Berg fails to meet the minimum requirements of standing.
Three elements constitute the “irreducible constitutional minimum” of standing: (1) an injury-in-fact, (2) a causal connection between the injury and the challenged conduct of the defendant (traceability), and (3) a likelihood that the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision of the court ... The injury-in-fact required by Article III is an invasion of a legally protected interest that is “concrete and particularized” as well as “actual or imminent,” rather than “conjectural” or "hypothetical." The injury cannot be merely a generalized grievance about the government that affects all citizens or derives from an interest in the proper enforcement of the law.
That final sentence, from FEC v. Akins, truly shows the similarity between the issue of voter standing and the issue of taxpayer standing. Just as you or I could not sue the United States of America claiming to have standing simply because we are taxpayers, the FEC contends--just as was contended by Obama and the DNC, as well as the defendants in the three similar cases against John McCain--that voters cannot raise the issue of constitutional eligibility just because they are voters.
The FEC also argues that, because it has no jurisdiction to enforce the constitutional eligibility of presidential candidates, it should be dismissed from this case. Instead, the Commission only has jurisdiction over campaign finance aspects of federal campaigns.
None of these statutes [the Federal Election Campaign Act, the Presidential Election Campaign Fund Act, or the Presidential Primary Matching Payment Account Act] delegates to the FEC authority to determine the constitutional eligibility of federal candidates, and Berg does not allege otherwise. Although the Commission determines whether certain presidential candidates are eligible for public funding, it has no power to determine who qualifies for ballot access or who is eligible to serve as president. Thus, because the Commission has no authority to take action against Senator Obama as suggested by Berg, the Commission should be dismissed from this case with prejudice.
Upon speaking with Philip Berg, the Philadelphia attorney mentioned that he was not surprised, that he felt he had already established his standing, and that the other argument by the FEC would be taken into consideration.
"We did not make specific allegations against them in our first complaint, however we have done so in our amended complaint," Berg said, noting that his motion for leave to amend is among the dozen or so pending pleadings before the court. "We will carefully look at their motion and what we have here, and make a decision at that point. Even so, the Federal Election Commission should ideally be one of the checks and balances in the system to ensure that this sort of thing doesn't happen."
This is another one going nowhere, just like Corsi and Michelle Obama-AIP.
We can’t and they won’t. Never mind.
Dang it Berg, I thought you did your homework. Off to Federal Court for you.
have an umbrella.
Why should anyone have to bring a complaint before a government body? If the guy can’t show that he is a citizen, he cannot serve as President, period. There has to be some government body that oversees this.
Do we wait until he is elected, then challenge him in a district court?
....and a little more from the FEC, according to them it’s a state law issue:
Dear Requesters,
The Federal Election Commission (FEC) is an independent regulatory agency with jurisdiction over the campaign financing of federal elections. The Commission enforces the limits on the sources and amounts of contributions to candidates for federal office, reviews the registration and periodic reports filed by political committees supporting federal candidates, and monitors the public funding of Presidential elections.
In regards to your concerns about the citizenship of Presidential candidate Barack Obama (and/or other candidates for federal office), please note that this issue does not fall within the FEC’s jurisdiction. The Commission was established solely to administer and enforce the federal campaign finance laws. As such, it does not have the legal authority to investigate a candidate’s citizenship or other qualifications for office.
In general, matters regarding candidate eligibility, voting/election procedure, ballot access/qualifications, voter registration and/or other issues related strictly to the election process are handled specifically under state law. Accordingly, you may wish to contact the appropriate agency that is responsible for dealing with such issues in your state or in the particular state(s) of interest. The Combined Federal/State Disclosure and Election Directory (CFSDED) contains contact names and information for each of the states; you may view this document here:
http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/cfsdd/cfsdd.shtml#Contents
Please note that each state establishes its own requirements for ballot access. Typically, as part of the ballot access process, a Presidential candidate (or the party on his/her behalf) must certify that he/she satisfies the qualifications set forth in Article II of the Constitution. If you believe that a candidate has filed a false certification, you may wish to consult an attorney to explore a possible legal challenge to that filing.
Additionally, if you have specific knowledge or information that gives you reason to believe a violation of the Federal Election Campaign Act and/or Regulations has occurred, you must file a formal complaint in order to initiate any action on the matter. For more information about this process, please consult our brochure entitled “Filing a Complaint,” attached below:
Please be sure to provide complete information in the proper format (no email) when making submissions to the Office of General Counsel, as described in the brochure. If you would like to confirm whether a proper complaint has already been filed with the FEC concerning this particular matter, please feel free to contact staff in the FEC’s Press Office at 202-694-1220 or 800-424-9530 press #1, when prompted).
Should you have any further questions regarding the federal campaign finance law, please contact staff in the FEC’s Information Division, toll-free, at 1-800-424-9530 (press #6, when prompted).
So, if he had taken public financing, he would have had to prove his eligibility to the FEC?
what happens when there is no rule of law?....that non citizens can vote and yes, run for president?.....how can individual secretaries of state single handedly try to chang2 the outcome of the election?....
I would certainly hope so. We're talking about the highest office in the land here. Bottom line -- he needs to show proof of citizenship to be eligible. It makes no sense that there is no government body to enforce a constitutional requirement.
Likely will go nowhere but this was the expected FEC filing and in itself says nothing about the case. The court hasn’t ruled...which seems irresponsible in light of the seriousness of the claims.
This would probably be the time the MSM chooses to start paying attention to this case, when there’s good news from their perspective.
If you believe that a candidate has filed a false certification, you may wish to consult an attorney to explore a possible legal challenge to that filing.
That is correct according to what I have been told.
The FEC’s charter is oversight of monies. They shouldn’t have been included in the first place.
Okay... then whose @#$%$%^$ job IS IT to determine if a candidate is eligible? McCain produced his birth certificate to show eligibility because he was born in the Canal Zone - Obama is the son of a non-citizen and there are questions raised as to his actual place of birth. He steadfastly refuses to produce a document as innocuous as a birth certificate - isn’t there some group that’s supposed to say - whoa, there!
Okay... then whose @#$%$%^$ job IS IT to determine if a candidate is eligible? McCain produced his birth certificate to show eligibility because he was born in the Canal Zone - Obama is the son of a non-citizen and there are questions raised as to his actual place of birth. He steadfastly refuses to produce a document as innocuous as a birth certificate - isn’t there some group that’s supposed to say - whoa, there!
You seem to be Mr. Negativity, Newbie. Go back to DU where you will be more appreciated.
The FEC is an unconstitutional body which should be dissolved. And, Mr. Berg’s travesty of a lawsuit will no doubt be dismissed shortly. Mr. Berg’s right to participate in the chusing of Electors for President of the United States is pursuant to the laws of Pennsylvania, and the right to vote for the Electors of his choice has NOTHING TO DO with Obama’s citizenship or lack thereof.
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.