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

To: Uncle Sham

The only way it will be dealt with is in the states.

It only takes a state or two to refuse a candidate on the ballot for lack of proof to end their campaign right there.


5 posted on 02/12/2011 8:44:17 AM PST by cripplecreek (Remember the River Raisin! (look it up))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: cripplecreek

I agree with you 100%. I don’t understand the process the states must follow. They can make a law but can Obambo declare it void by Presidential Order? Can it be appealled by the President or any Federal officials? If so, does the law take effect while waiting appeal? How long does it take to get these laws passed and enacted? Just a few questions thatyou and other Freepers can help me with. I live in a Blue state and nobody would lift a finger to discuss Obambo.


8 posted on 02/12/2011 8:52:37 AM PST by DrDude (Focused like a LASER on creating jobs!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: cripplecreek

Unless such a law is structured to disqualify other candidates as well.


15 posted on 02/12/2011 9:07:57 AM PST by TXConservative25
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: cripplecreek
"The only way it will be dealt with is in the states."

What if only one small, solidly Republican state requires eligibility? Could Obama get away with ignoring it and staying off the ballot? How would he and the nation respond?

I think the media would try to discredit the state and call it a stunt. They would spin it that Obama should boycott that state's ballot as a matter of "principle." But the spin will not gain traction, and eligibility will become an unignorable issue. Obama's best chance would be legal challenges by third parties.

33 posted on 02/12/2011 10:58:05 AM PST by UnwashedPeasant (Don't nuke me, bro)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: wintertime; cripplecreek; DrDude; kindred; faucetman; omegadawn; kingu; brushcop; David; ...
"The only way it will be dealt with is in the states."

What we need is for the states, on their own, to begin thinking about passing a "Usurper Detection Act"

There is nothing to prevent a state from passing a law requiring that the President must file his PROOF of meeting eligibility requirements with the state and that such a filing is open to public challenge in court.

Such a law could stipulate that any legislation signed by a President who refuses or is unable to meet this requirement to file shall be declared null and void within the borders of the state. No orders affecting any of the states citizens from such a usurper would have legal standing within the borders of the state. In addition, the act could command all legislators at the national level to institute whatever legal mechanism is required to challenge the standing of such a usurper.

It seems to me, any state-passed law that ENFORCES the Constitution would be judged as "Constitutional". Perhaps this can be done through a ballot initiative if the legislators refuse to look into it. We do not have to WAIT until the next Presidential election to handcuff a possible usurper. This can be done NOW and immediately protect a state's citizens from having to live with ILLEGALLY made legislation or orders.

68 posted on 02/12/2011 11:00:50 PM PST by Uncle Sham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | 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