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

To: plain talk
I disagree and I will tell you why. If that were the case and if Jones V Bush did not set a standard for standing, then there would have been a flood of lawsuits against President G.W. Bush. We have a system to challege the President in matter.

1. Elections

2. Electorial College session.
17 posted on 06/11/2012 11:02:20 AM PDT by Perdogg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]


To: Perdogg

“We have a system to challege the President in matter.

1. Elections

2. Electorial College session.”

The standard is not who gets to be on ballots nor who gets to be voted in by the electoral college, but who gets to be president. If any random citizen does not have the standing to enforce the clause guarantying them an NBC as president then standing is some bizarre esoteric standard divorced from common sense and standing in the way of.

This, by the way, is from someone who thinks Obama is an NBC and that birtherism is a waste of time. If the courts can strike down politically motivated challenges, be they against Bush the Younger or Obama, merely because they’re a waste of time, then our legal system would have traded justice for convenience.

Which is not to say that this is a secret. What the heck else are plea bargains about, anyway? It’s just that it’s not always so baldly and obviously unjust. At least with plea bargains you can pretend.


26 posted on 06/11/2012 11:19:27 AM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: Perdogg

Well I agree that the electoral college or congress should have ensured obama or any candidate is qualified. The fact that law suits are even required four years after the fact is pathetic

But on my point - a lawsuit by a partisan politician on our side carries baggage and is analogous to a lawsuit brought by al gore. I doubt that had anything to do with the SC not taking the case. Just an observation.


33 posted on 06/11/2012 11:32:39 AM PDT by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: Perdogg

Perhaps electors should have been sued instead.


83 posted on 06/11/2012 2:08:21 PM PDT by Crucial (Tolerance at the expense of equal treatment is the path to tyranny.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: Perdogg
I disagree and I will tell you why. If that were the case and if Jones V Bush did not set a standard for standing, then there would have been a flood of lawsuits against President G.W. Bush. We have a system to challege the President in matter.
1. Elections
2. Electorial College session.

So what you're saying is "Once he crosses the finish-line nothing can disqualify him."

I wonder, does this mean that no law applies to the President?

94 posted on 06/11/2012 5:40:05 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | 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