[Canedawg]

“A case about whether a candidate is a natural born citizen seems quite clearly to arise under the Constitution, and thus within the exclusive domain of the courts.”
- ———— ———— -—

No argument there, but the standing requirements still pose a barrier to WHOM may bring such a suit.

Judge Surrick followed the principle of stare decisis, and ruled on the Berg case in accordance with previous case decisions that dismissed similar cases due to a lack of standing.

He could have decided otherwise, and forced the defendants to appeal, but unless the SCOTUS makes law by changing the standing requirement, these cases will meet similar outcomes.

That is why Alan Keyes’ case is different, and why his case has a better chance of being decided on the merits.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

What is different about Keyes case?

[BIGLOOK]

There were cases of 'natural born citizen' that were adjudicated and entered into case law on another thread. Perhaps Lucy can lead us to them.

Essentially they involve a child born to an American citizen and an immigrant who became a naturalized citizen, the judgment was that the child was a natural born citizen. In the case of two immigrants who became naturalized citizens, the judgment was also that the child was a natural born citizen. However in cases involving an American citizen and an immigrant not naturalized or to immigrants not naturalized, the child born in the US was not a natural born citizen.