I do agree that the Supreme Court is the final arbiter. The Supreme Court has not ruled on what the specifics of natural born actually are, although lower courts have made some rulings. I don't know when this will reach the Supreme Court, or if the will actually rule on what definitively is natural born. Even if they do, the issue of Hawaii's position that Obama is and was eligible, raises the issue of should states have the exact same eligibility requirements, etc. I think the states that pass their own eligibility requirements, and are unwilling to recognize other states is a more important issue going forward. This is not a state's rights issue, and can't be simply because it is a federal election.
Sounds like Philip Berg is lying. As long as Obama remains black and has an African born father, people will deny that he is as American as any other American. Arguing with the birthers is like trying to reason with Islamist extremists, they are beyond the reach of reason and sanity. Plus, they probably are terrible traders. And most probably like to have sex with trannies. So forget about them. They're the dregs of society and can be led by the nose by a vain and vulgar demagogue like Trump. Not one of them could afford to buy a condo from Trump, so he is going to sell them his candidacy instead.
what you believe or I believe does not matter. Marbury vs. Madison is the law of the land until some branch provokes a constitutional crisis. But, if you were correct that its a states rights issue, then each state may determine what level of proof they need to be on their ballot. That would be a disaster for Obama.
"if you were correct that its a states rights issue" My position is that it is not a state's rights issue, never has been a legitimate state's rights issue, that it is a federal issue. That's why I think any state that tries to ban Obama from the ballot on the citizenship issue, will be shot down. It is silly really, states don't determine citizenship, the United States, i.e. Federal Government, determines citizenship. I know that many of the Goober states inhabitants think they are citizens of their own state before being American...but that's because they are not too bright. States just have to accept that being part of the union limits some of their freedoms, that's part of the deal. If they want try and secede when they don't get their way...
WRONG. you really have no clue and are clearly terrified of the consequences. I could care less either way, but felt the need to point out the idiotocracy of this statement. RIght or wrong, its good to see Trump putting his money were his mouth is. surf
You really think Trump is spending his own money? I would like to see the cancelled checks on that one...
1. are you arguing that HI gets to determine if Obama is a citizen 2. are you arguing HI gets to determine if he is a Natural born citizen. 3. States seem to have control over the electoral college, so in absence of Supreme Court decision state that the Constitution requires that each state accept the following as proof of natural born citizen... the states are probably going to create their own requirement.
No, I am arguing that Hawaii did certify Obama, and as such, the issue can be questioned by other states...but they can't deny Obama or Hawaii's position without strong evidence to support their position. If the state of Hawaii said they saw the birth certificate...since when is that not enough? This is why the birthers are just plain crazy. They want to make a states rights case to deny Hawaii's position, without evidence to support their claim. It is a federal issue, this should be decided in a federal court. Any state that pulls any nonsense to try and deny the sitting president of the United States of America the right to be on the ballot, will get slapped so silly with a federal injunction, it is just insane that a stupid state would take this foolish approach. The US Courts, i.e. Federal Courts will settle it...not the states. All it does is make the states look foolish. The state attorney general can file a suit in federal court, fine. But to pass legislation on their own is willful ignorance or worse. What is so inconsistent about all of this, is that in 2000, the republicans, because they didn't like the ruling of states right of the State Supreme Court of Florida's conclusion in the Bush/Gore election lunacy, they went directly to the Federal Courts. So it is okay to go with the state when you get your way, but then deny the state when you don't get your way? That event, combined with this event, just go to show that the GOP and their spawn are a bunch of unprincipled klannish...
You and Optional are both wrong, but you Jem are an ignoramus nonpareil United States Constitution, Article IV, Section I: "Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof." It's quite clear that if HI certifies the birth of an individual, then it must be recognized by each and every other state. Even Idaho and Alaska. And btw, Marketsurfer, why don't you go back to blowing Larry Conners.