[edge919]

If you are correct about Justice Scalia’s views, I sure wish that he would have put an Obama eligiblity appeal that preseneted the two citizen parent arguement on the “Discuss List” for one of the Certiorari conferences. Thus far, zilch.

I'm not saying anything specifically about Scalia's views. From the questions he was asking, he was recognizing that the persons in question (who were born outside of the United States) wouldn't be NBCs. As to whether Scalia fully understands the definition of NBC, I would say no. We have nothing to show that. By asking questions, he seemed a little unclear on it.

Any Justice can put an appeal on the discuss list, otherwise the denial of cert is automatic.

As for him putting the appeals on the discuss list, maybe he hasn't read those appeals. IIRC, not all the appeals directly or correctly addressed the two-parent argument. Even if they did, that doesn't mean the cases were able to overcome the obstacle of "legal standing." Short of that, why would a judge put such a case on a discuss list?

[jh4freedom]

As for him putting the appeals on the discuss list, maybe he hasn’t read those appeals. IIRC, not all the appeals directly or correctly addressed the two-parent argument. Even if they did, that doesn’t mean the cases were able to overcome the obstacle of “legal standing.” Short of that, why would a judge put such a case on a discuss list?

---

That’s what’s great about being on the Supreme Court of the United States, the court of last resort. They can rule on any legal issue that any four justices agree to take up. And any one Justice can initiate a discussion of the issues of an appeal by putting an appeal on the discuss list.

Both Kerchner v Obama and Hollister v Soetoro specifically made the two citizen parent argument and asked the Supreme Court to overturn lower court rulings on standing and hear those appeals on the merits of the constitutional claims.