Replies

You and I have gone around before on whether there was a lower court finding of standing for Hollister (I'm not a lawyer and I don't recall that you are and I haven't seen any FReeper lawyer who agrees with you...link please?)

Bottom line, the case was dismissed without being heard on the merits whether under a narrow or broad definition of standing.

IIRC, Hollister’s attempt to gain standing (achieved or not) was basically indistinguishable from Kerchner’s with both being retired military hypothetically subject to recall to serve under an apparently ineligible CIC.

Will SCOTUS chose Hollister over Kerchner as a possible case to reach the issue on the merits? I doubt it, but I don't presume to know how SCOTUS will rule like the anti-birthers.

SCOTUS “evaded” ruling on 2A gun rights or corporate rights as “legal persons” to make campaign contributions for decades until the “right” case came to them and they could “reach” the issue on a basis that could get a majority opinion.

I don't know, and neither does anybody else IMO whether the SCOTUS refusal to hear these cases reflects an affirmation that Obama is NBC or whether the particular plaintiffs were simply unable to get over the standing or merits (as you call it) hurdles to get the case heard. SCOTUS has never commented on exactly why they refused to hear any of the eligibility cases

It has just occurred to my that the fact that Sotomayor and Kagan chose not to recuse themselves could be a hint that the refusal to grant cert was based only on standing (or right to have the case heard on the merits for AV), not an affirmation that Obama is NBC.

Sotomayor and Kagan could rationalize that they retained judicial impartiality when ruling on the standing of Kerchner because the NBC issue would not actually be before them because Obama's personal and DOJ attorneys have made sure that no evidence proving who Obama's father is has yet been submitted at trial. SCOTUS is an appeals court and can only rule on whether the law has been correctly applied to the facts presented at trial.

With no trial yet, not facts in evidence that Obama is dual citizen or NBC, no birth certificate in evidence means no ability for SCOTUS to rule on eligibility which means no need for Sotomayor or Kagan to recuse themselves.