This is why I hate people...

/facepalm

Today, the United States Supreme Court scheduled the case - Leo C. Donofrio v. Nina Mitchell Wells, Secretary of State of the State of New Jersey - US Supreme Court Docket No. 08A407 - for a conference of the nine Justices. The conference is a completely private affair and the public may not attend. If four of the nine Justices vote to hear the case in full, oral argument may be scheduled. The conference is scheduled for December 5, 2008, ten days before the meeting of the Electoral College.

The case originally sought, pre-election, to have the names of Barack Obama, John McCain, and Roger Calero removed from New Jersey ballots, and for a stay of the “national election” pending Supreme Court review of whether those candidates were eligible under the Constitution as natural born Citizens, as is required by Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution of the United States.

Leo Donofrio brought his case from a lower New Jersey court to the NJ Supreme Court - was denied - and then he filed an emergency stay application in the United States Supreme Court on Nov. 3, 2008, before the Honorable Associate Justice David Souter. Justice Souter denied the emergency stay application on Nov. 6.

Leo Donofrio renewed the application, as per Supreme Court Rule 22.4, to the Honorable Associate Justice Clarence Thomas by way of Express mail on Nov. 14. The application arrived at the Supreme Court on Nov. 17 and was submitted directly to Justice Thomas.

On Nov. 19, the case was docketed for full conference of all nine Justices and scheduled for December 5, 2008.

I thought this was bs until I looked up the docket number on the supreme court's website... it's slated for Dec. 5th...

This is why we can't have nice things.

Original Post by santonacci:

Original Post by monarch777:

Another question I have is...why would President Elect Obama have even been allowed to run for office if his citizenship had been in question?

If his citizenship were in question, he wouldn't have even been allowed to have a US passport. 

 You have to be a legal citizen to be issued a passport, a Naturalized citizen to run for president. I don't think they are questioning his citizenship, just his typeof citizenship. Look at Gov Swartzengger. He meets the criteria to be a Governor, but not a President.

Original Post by jguerard:

I don't see the problem. The arguer seem to defeat himeself by saying Barack Obama was admittedly a citizen of both Britain and the United States at the time of his birth. Therefore he meets the conditions set forth in the constitution of being a natural born citizen of the United States. Dual citizenship is not excluded under the constitution, being a natural born British Citizen does not exclude him from being a natural born United States citizen.

The arguer is really saying that dual citizenship at birth would cause a split loyalty. But this is their own opinion, and is not in the constituion.

It's up to the scotus to determine the intent of the founders. They could quite literally legislate him out of office...

I can't imagine a world in which that would occur, but it's technically possible.

I just wish people would let it go... it's done, Obama won... Rejoice or get over it, whichever suits their mood.

Original Post by m0m6:

Well, this case might have been going on since the beginning. It already went the rounds of the appellate courts, so its possible that this case was brought up in the beginning of the campagine trail. It's still bogus and frivolous (._.)

 Yes.  So frivoulous, in fact, that if it were a Calorie-count post, it would have been deleted a LONG time ago

Original Post by ignayshus:

Original Post by jguerard:

I don't see the problem. The arguer seem to defeat himeself by saying Barack Obama was admittedly a citizen of both Britain and the United States at the time of his birth. Therefore he meets the conditions set forth in the constitution of being a natural born citizen of the United States. Dual citizenship is not excluded under the constitution, being a natural born British Citizen does not exclude him from being a natural born United States citizen.

The arguer is really saying that dual citizenship at birth would cause a split loyalty. But this is their own opinion, and is not in the constituion.

It's up to the scotus to determine the intent of the founders. They could quite literally legislate him out of office...

I can't imagine a world in which that would occur, but it's technically possible.

I just wish people would let it go... it's done, Obama won... Rejoice or get over it, whichever suits their mood.

If they find in favor of the plaintiff, then the election wasn't valid and the current administration will have to stay in office longer, until a new election can take place.  It will be just like other places we've spread democracy to.  :)

zomg!!! a bloodless coupe'

;)

Actually this is why we can't have nice things.

I've got hold of all my mates and we've put together the Australian brigades to come and fight in the 2nd US Civil War.  All we ask is that we get to fight at one of those places with really good names.

We just don't want to be known for being overrun at the 2009 Battle of Normal lol!

Original Post by kathygator:

Actually this is why we can't have nice things.

bwahhh

Original Post by santonacci:

Apparently, my hubby and I need to either create, or invest in, a company specializing in the manufacture of tin foil hats, and we might actually break even this year.

Hey!  How did you get ahold of a picture of my family??? 

Has anyone here ever tried wearing a tin foil hat to see if you experienced anything different (like clarity of thought, presumably)?

Anyone?

Anyone?

seriously who hasn't worn a tinfoil hat at least once?

oh 

*feels inadequate*

i'm wearing one now

Original Post by nomoreexcuses:

Has anyone here ever tried wearing a tin foil hat to see if you experienced anything different (like clarity of thought, presumably)?

Anyone?

Anyone?

 I haven't but someone on here might have...

http://zapatopi.net/afdb/  (Aluminum Foil Deflector Beanie)

Original Post by nomoreexcuses:

If they find in favor of the plaintiff, then the election wasn't valid and the current administration will have to stay in office longer, until a new election can take place. 

Section 1 of the 20th Ammendment says that Bush's term has to end on January 20th.

Wouldn't it go to Biden until Congress decides who officially gets the office?

Ammendment 20, section 3:

If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice-President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice-President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice-President shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice-President shall have qualified.

so much for that coup!

good catch santo  :D

(that is a very sad section of an amendment though)

Original Post by nomoreexcuses:

Has anyone here ever tried wearing a tin foil hat to see if you experienced anything different (like clarity of thought, presumably)?

 No increase in clarity of thought (hey, it's not Don Julio!!), but I'm pretty sure it thwarted that one mind reader who completely failed to guess my religion.

Original Post by nomoreexcuses:

so much for that coup!

good catch santo  :D

Meh - how much of a geek am I that I have a link to the COTUS in my Favorites folder?

Original Post by santonacci:

Original Post by nomoreexcuses:

so much for that coup!

good catch santo  :D

Meh - how much of a geek am I that I have a link to the COTUS in my Favorites folder?

 Not much of one.

CBO or GAO would be a different story.

Seems to me that there was no "UNITED STATES" when the framers of the constitution were born and so they would have to grandfather themselves in.  They were British Citizens when born...

Which does not speak to the issue of "dual citizenship"

The framers said nothing about dual citizenship.....  Born in US seems to me to be a "natural born citizen"