Read post #27. The court contradicted itself several times and made several flawed and unsupported arguments in response to the plaintiffs. The only thing they really did was say that they didn’t have to accept the plaintiff’s arguments as true. It’s a very poorly written and supported decision. Read post #27.
Initially, we note that the Plaintiffs do not cite to any authority recognizing that the Governor has a duty to determine the eligibility of a party‟s nominee for the presidency. The Plaintiffs do not cite to authority, nor do they develop a cogent legal argument stating that a certificate of ascertainment has any relation to the eligibility of the candidates. However, we note that even if the Governor does have such a duty, for the reasons below we cannot say that President Barack Obama or Senator John McCain was not eligible to become President.
IOW, the Plaintiffs did not present a valid argument for which relief could be granted. Everything else is just fluff. Telling me repeatedly to read post 27 (which I did a long time ago, thanks ....) does not change the facts.