Actually it wasn't my ass, it was an anti-Obama political blogging site's ass.
TaskmasterJack Send a noteboard - 17/04/2011 03:56:35 AM
Which I mistakenly assumed had squeezed an actual fact into their birther tirade. That site was trying to blame Congress for failing in it's "customary duties". It turns out however, after further research on numerous other sites, that while the Constitution is clear on various factors of eligibility for Presidency, it is rather unclear on who those proofs of eligibility should be presented to, or what action, if anything, should be taken or by whom if a President were found to violate an eligibility rule.
Some of the sites I found angrily indicated that it is the responsibility of the various Secretarys of States to each vet the candidates on their State's ballots but that almost none of them bother and just assume each candidate is eligible if they progress far enough in the nomination process.
I thought Justice Benjamin R. Curtis' comments were interesting (although they pre-date the 14th Amendment):
"The Constitution having recognized that persons born within the several States are citizens of the United States, one of four things must be true:
First. That the constitution itself has described what native-born persons shall or shall not be citizens of such State, and thereby be citizens of the United States; or,
Second:. That it has empowered Congress to do so; or,
Third. That all free persons, born within the several States, are citizens of the United States; or,
Fourth. That it is left to each State to determine what free persons, born within its limits, shall be citizens of such State, and thereby be citizens of the United States."
Apparently, there is a statutory method wherein a President-elect's eligibility may be challenged by Congress, but I found nothing about what to do for sitting Presidents.
It's all very interesting, with very few definitive answers, and I admit it was my mistake in originally only checking a single website about "proof of Presidential eligibility" before posting. It did sound like something that would be probable... like Grant being buried in Grant's tomb.
Some of the sites I found angrily indicated that it is the responsibility of the various Secretarys of States to each vet the candidates on their State's ballots but that almost none of them bother and just assume each candidate is eligible if they progress far enough in the nomination process.
I thought Justice Benjamin R. Curtis' comments were interesting (although they pre-date the 14th Amendment):
"The Constitution having recognized that persons born within the several States are citizens of the United States, one of four things must be true:
First. That the constitution itself has described what native-born persons shall or shall not be citizens of such State, and thereby be citizens of the United States; or,
Second:. That it has empowered Congress to do so; or,
Third. That all free persons, born within the several States, are citizens of the United States; or,
Fourth. That it is left to each State to determine what free persons, born within its limits, shall be citizens of such State, and thereby be citizens of the United States."
Apparently, there is a statutory method wherein a President-elect's eligibility may be challenged by Congress, but I found nothing about what to do for sitting Presidents.
It's all very interesting, with very few definitive answers, and I admit it was my mistake in originally only checking a single website about "proof of Presidential eligibility" before posting. It did sound like something that would be probable... like Grant being buried in Grant's tomb.
This message last edited by TaskmasterJack on 17/04/2011 at 03:58:58 AM
WTF arizona?
15/04/2011 04:28:19 PM
- 1938 Views
I think it's more payback than anything else, what exactly are you objecting to anyway?
15/04/2011 04:46:17 PM
- 861 Views
Yeah, I'm going "wait, they didn't have to do that yet?" here as well.
15/04/2011 08:40:44 PM
- 762 Views
It is a bit of an oversight not to have that
15/04/2011 09:41:40 PM
- 946 Views
that's because they're morons.
16/04/2011 03:36:54 AM
- 873 Views
Re: that's because they're morons.
16/04/2011 04:27:04 AM
- 735 Views
I wouldn't ACTUALLY hunt boars with a boar spear, but that's because I'm too little
16/04/2011 04:44:14 AM
- 906 Views
it's the spirit, not the letter, of the law that i have a problem with
15/04/2011 10:19:27 PM
- 821 Views
Surprisingly, many politicians are mean-spirited
16/04/2011 02:31:37 AM
- 814 Views
if any of those examples were legislated by a state house, you'd have a stronger argument....
16/04/2011 07:23:49 AM
- 762 Views
I believe I gave you state examples already
16/04/2011 01:55:37 PM
- 700 Views
I call shenanigans on Seel
15/04/2011 04:48:48 PM
- 809 Views
really becasue Obama has already produced enough documents to clear this bar
17/04/2011 01:04:39 AM
- 785 Views
The article is wrong on one key point. Obama has not produced a birth certificate
15/04/2011 04:50:21 PM
- 893 Views
Yes he has. Don't act like a fool.
15/04/2011 05:02:58 PM
- 963 Views
sorry but it is not the same so don't act like a fool
15/04/2011 06:04:19 PM
- 914 Views
It's clear that he was born in the US.
15/04/2011 06:54:28 PM
- 869 Views
Care to point out where you believe I was defending them?
15/04/2011 07:37:39 PM
- 831 Views
You say that Obama hasn't produced a birth certificate, when he has.
15/04/2011 07:47:54 PM
- 768 Views
What exactly is the difference between certificates?
16/04/2011 12:13:04 AM
- 843 Views
One is the origianl document and one is a certificate created when it is requested.
17/04/2011 12:44:27 AM
- 868 Views
Then you need be be more clear because that is not what you said.
17/04/2011 03:14:03 AM
- 823 Views
Presumably you want his certificate of stillbirth as well?
16/04/2011 12:59:22 PM
- 802 Views
thanks for your contribution. They are all important no matter how small *NM*
17/04/2011 12:50:55 AM
- 432 Views
thanks for your contribution. They are all important no matter how small *NM*
17/04/2011 12:50:56 AM
- 398 Views
I wish the birthers would stop waste everyone's time and focus on actual policies of Obama's.
15/04/2011 04:59:01 PM
- 913 Views
Actually
15/04/2011 06:12:41 PM
- 870 Views
He already has
16/04/2011 07:41:43 AM
- 842 Views
I'm not referring to Obama. Just anyone who wants to be anyone in the future. *NM*
16/04/2011 02:01:25 PM
- 376 Views
Don't we already do this?
15/04/2011 06:24:29 PM
- 812 Views
He did produce his Certificate of Live Birth and was approved to run for President. Case closed.
16/04/2011 11:42:05 PM
- 853 Views
Re: I actually find the whole thing hilarious, and I hope it continues.
16/04/2011 01:33:34 AM
- 864 Views
What's the problem? Show your birth certficate, problem solved. *NM*
16/04/2011 03:32:37 AM
- 416 Views
problem was solved awhile ago when he produced his birth certificate. what are you holding onto? *NM*
16/04/2011 07:29:39 AM
- 421 Views
Perhaps he's responding to the actual post, and not talking about Obama this time? *NM*
16/04/2011 12:56:50 PM
- 388 Views
As per the Constitution, Congress already verifies eligibility. Of each President.
16/04/2011 03:36:06 PM
- 799 Views
Did you mean to reply to me or to the main post? *NM*
16/04/2011 03:44:38 PM
- 404 Views
You. Well, the trzaska subthread in general. Although it applies to the overall topic equally. *NM*
16/04/2011 03:53:38 PM
- 384 Views
Which is why I would think even if this law passes it will be tossed as it should.
16/04/2011 11:44:50 PM
- 784 Views
Supposedly the FEC only has jurisdiction over matters of campaign finance. *NM*
17/04/2011 03:24:39 AM
- 482 Views
as per you pulled that out of your ass
17/04/2011 01:16:15 AM
- 772 Views
Actually it wasn't my ass, it was an anti-Obama political blogging site's ass.
17/04/2011 03:56:35 AM
- 843 Views
not only is no one in charge of making sure the president meets all the qualifications
18/04/2011 02:51:16 AM
- 829 Views
To make things even more fun in this thread...
18/04/2011 03:50:43 AM
- 859 Views
I am not a birther, but WTF makes you a nutjob for this?
18/04/2011 08:40:15 AM
- 982 Views
read above, he has. *NM*
18/04/2011 02:47:25 PM
- 393 Views
Provided a birth certificate?
18/04/2011 02:51:56 PM
- 1174 Views
Why is a Certification of Live Birth insufficient?
18/04/2011 08:43:34 PM
- 870 Views
because it's easier to push a non-issue than it is to work on something constructive i guess....
19/04/2011 04:27:31 AM
- 718 Views
No, actually
19/04/2011 05:18:52 AM
- 911 Views
Since when is religion hereditary?
19/04/2011 02:57:30 PM
- 919 Views
Re: Since when is religion hereditary?
19/04/2011 03:10:27 PM
- 859 Views
Re: Since when is religion hereditary?
19/04/2011 03:32:10 PM
- 952 Views
I don't think it's as strong a claim as you make it out to be
19/04/2011 03:39:01 PM
- 1056 Views
how many previous presidents have had to prove their place of birth?
19/04/2011 04:34:42 PM
- 785 Views
with how many has it been in doubt? *NM*
19/04/2011 05:08:18 PM
- 428 Views
why doubt this one beyond all others? *NM*
19/04/2011 06:45:24 PM
- 374 Views
people always find some reason to doubt the legitimacy of a president they don't like
19/04/2011 09:01:33 PM
- 951 Views
Brewer vetoes the bill!
19/04/2011 02:31:50 AM
- 997 Views
yay, she's not as much of a nutjob as i once thought she was!
19/04/2011 04:28:05 AM
- 879 Views
yes she is, don't let her fool you *NM*
19/04/2011 04:31:10 PM
- 340 Views
i didn't say she's not, just not as much as i thought before *NM*
19/04/2011 04:37:34 PM
- 387 Views