Dec 25 2008
Twentieth Amendment
In the beginning of the 2008 Presidential primary, Fred Hollander sued John S. McCain because he said he was ineligible due to his place of birth in the Panama Canal.
Matthew McGill, Amir C. Tayrani and Charles G. Douglas III wrote the “Motion to Dismiss” the suit and you will notice that there are many points they make that are pertinent to the present question of how and, when, to deal with Mr. Obama’s constitutional alleged ineligibity to serve in the Office of the Presidency.
Many of the supporters of Mr. Obama, claim that there is much ado about nothing, when it comes to pointing out Obama’s British citizenship. They point out that the Supreme Court has not held a hearing on the several cases that have been brought to the Supreme Court, so, therefore, there must not be any grounds for worry.
However, today, I read a little about the 20th amendment in the Motion to dismiss by
Matthew McGill, Amir C. Tayrani & Charles G. Douglass III(pg 11) of the reasons why the Supreme Court’s may be reluctant to interfere with the candidate’s eligibility, at this time. According to the Constitution, that is part of the political process
and rests with the respective political parties, voters, and then, the Electoral College.
The Twentieth Amendment, however, does provide that the new Congress will have the responsibility to choose an “eligible” President, if the Electoral College fails to do so. It has been rumored that since Mr. Obama was born a British subject (by his own words), that some members of Congress will challenge the vote on January 6th of 2009.
McGill & Douglas go on to say that “if the court acted upon the question of the candidate’s eligibility before the Electoral college and Congress have acted, then “it may be involving itself in political matters and interfering with the Constitutional authority of the Electoral college and Congress to evaluate the qualifications of the candidate.” It might, furthermore, lead to aggrandizement of power in the Judical branch and the Framers were very careful to create a balance of powers.
McGill & Douglas also state that the courts do not rule on the eligibility to run for the Office of the Presidency, because that would impinge on their First Amendment rights, as well. These lawyers state that “the Supreme court and the lower federal courts have consistently held that voters do not have “standing” to challenge the qualifications of candidates for elected federal office.”
I might also mention that the Senate passed a Resolution (511) based on the scholarly opinions of Larry Tribe and Theodore Olsen that Senator McCain should be considered a “natural born citizen.”
