Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: curiosity
Perhaps you cannot understand it because your premise is incorrect.

What do you mean? You can't even sign up for little league without showing a birth certificate, but Obama was allowed to register as a candidate for president in every state without having to actually document his eligiblity to hold that office. After that the courts found that no one has standing to sue Obama to produce such documentation. The whole system is backwards. A candidate should not be allowed to have his or her name placed on ballots without first filing documentation demonstrating qualifications to hold the office. The burden of proof should be on the candidate to provide the documentation. If the states and their attorneys general hadn't been sitting on their butts in the first place, they could have forced Obama to document proof of "natural born citizen" status.

37 posted on 02/16/2009 4:19:05 PM PST by Paleo Conservative (If the feds can't competently handle the DTV transition, why should we trust them with health care?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]


To: Paleo Conservative
What do you mean? You can't even sign up for little league without showing a birth certificate, but Obama was allowed to register as a candidate for president in every state without having to actually document his eligiblity to hold that office.

How do you know he did show either his BC, passport or other document to one of the secretaries of state?

After that the courts found that no one has standing to sue Obama to produce such documentation.

This is very basic. Courts do not allow people to sue unless they have standing. To have standing, you have to show that you have an interest in the case that is greater than that of the general public at large. This is a very long-standing rule and standard in our court system, and it is there for good reason. The courts could not function if any private citizen could sue any public official over any matter that affects the public at large. No court system could handle such a caseload.

That is why we have a political process (i.e. elections & elected officials) to handle matters that concern the public at large. The courts have no business intervening in such things. This is all part of the conservative doctrine of judicial restraint.

If one of the electors or secretaries of state were not satisfied with Obama's elgibility, and wanted proof, they would have standing. But not a single one of them has raised the issue.

Why do you suppose that is? Are all 50 secretaries of state, and all 400+ electors in on some huge conspiracy?

41 posted on 02/16/2009 4:27:46 PM PST by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: Paleo Conservative

A big affirmative action fan, don’tchaknow. ‘He don’t need no stinkin’ birth certificate. He say he’s American through and through. It’s just people demandin’ this shyte from The One. Let ‘um read comix, the forgeries are good nuff.’


42 posted on 02/16/2009 4:28:25 PM PST by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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