Obama’s supporters like to write off those who are concerned with Obama’s Constitutional eligibility as nutters or extremists. They call them “Birthers”, in an attempt to bracket them with the conspiracy theorists called “Truthers” who claim Bush was behind the World Trade Center attack. In fact, more than 50% of the American voting population doubts Obama’s eligibility, so its not a fringe issue. An Army Colonel is among those who wanted the issue resolved. A father of three, he now wastes away in Leavenworth Military prison while soldiers in Afghanistan have dire need of his medical skills. Interest in the issue continues to grow while the Obama camp (which includes most of the mainstream media) does all it can to keep it low profile.
Now, Charles E. Rice, professor emeritus at Notre Dame Law School (retired) argues that it’s “time for a new approach” on the eligibility controversy. He suggests the Supreme Court is understandably reluctant to rule on the issue, given that so far all cases have been dismissed for lack of standing or incorrect process. The substance of Obama’s eligibility has never been tested in court. He further suggests that the issue can perhaps be resolved by means of the investigative power of Congress. A committee of the House of Representatives could be authorized to conduct an investigation into the eligibility issue. He says-
I suggest no conclusion as to whether Obama is eligible or not. But the citizens whom the media and political pundits dismiss as “birthers” have raised legitimate questions. That legitimacy is fueled by Obama’s curious, even bizarre, refusal to consent to the release of the relevant records. Perhaps there is nothing to the issues raised. Or perhaps there is. This is potentially serious business. If it turns out that Obama knew he was ineligible when he campaigned and when he took the oath as President, it could be the biggest political fraud in the history of the world. As long as Obama refuses to disclose the records, speculation will grow and grow without any necessary relation to the truth. The first step toward resolving the issue is full discovery and disclosure of the facts.
The courts are not the only entities empowered to deal with such a question. A committee of the House of Representatives could be authorized to conduct an investigation into the eligibility issue. It is difficult to imagine, to borrow [Woodrow] Wilson’s phrase, a more pressing “affair of government” than the question of whether a sitting President obtained his office illegally, and perhaps even by fraud. An investigating body must not prejudge the case. Its concern must be, first, to put the facts on the record and then to consider whatever legislation or other remedy might be appropriate in light of those facts.
The House of Representatives is an appropriate body to inquire into the facts and legal implications of a President’s disputed eligibility for the office. [..] The power to investigate can be exercised by a House committee provided that the investigation is within that committee’s authorization as determined by the House. An investigation into Obama’s eligibility by a committee or subcommittee of the House could have several legitimate objectives, including among others:
1. To ascertain the facts, compelling by subpoena the production of all the available records relevant to Obama’s eligibility, including the complete Hawaiian records of his birth; his passport records to ascertain whether he traveled to Pakistan in 1981 on an American or other passport; the records from Occidental College, Columbia University and Harvard Law School to determine whether Obama described himself as a foreign student; and such other records as may be relevant. The disclosure of such information to the public would be an appropriate exercise of Congress’ “informing function.”
2. The consideration of legislation to require candidates for a federal elective office to produce, at an appropriate time, evidence of their eligibility for that office. There is now no federal law or regulation that requires such disclosure.
3. The consideration of legislation to define the constitutional term, “a natural born Citizen.”
The American people do not know whether the current President achieved election by misrepresenting, innocently or by fraud, his eligibility for that office. I neither know nor suggest the answer to that question. But it would be a public service for the House of Representatives to employ its authority to determine those facts and to recommend any indicated changes in the law or the Constitution.
I don’t agree with that changes to the Constitution bit. Obama is a fraud. Let’s lead him from the White House in handcuffs and jail him. The Professor is saying that the House of Representatives has the power to conduct an investigation so let’s get the damn hell on with it. Get this legal opinion out to every Republican rep out there, and let’s hassle them until they do something.
12 thoughts on “Notre Dame Law School Professor Says Obama Eligibility Issue Should Be Resolved”
We should all! be focusing on these facts: http://tdarkcabal.blogspot.com/ and this: Obama is flat out not eligible. If he were eligible there would have been no need to alter the Certificate of Nominations as explained here: http://thedailypen.blogspot.com/2011/01/o-con-had-legal-help-from-non-partisan.html We had better get this straightened out before the country is totally ruined. Nancy P, the DNC, the State of Hawaii and the DPH are in deep way over there heads. This will absolutely unravel. Just a matter of time. Brian Schatz is the key conspirator, criminal, fraudster. Why doesn’t Abercrombie just ask Schatz how he certified OBUMER to be on the ballot? And what about Kevin Cronin? What was his role? Every American should avail themselves of the facts. The above articles do a lot to shine a light on the subject.
Thanks for the links. I’ll check them out.
“The substance of Obama’s eligibility has never been tested in court.”
There’s a reason why some 90-odd cases have been dismissed. There is
no case against Obama.
This is indeed something appropriate for Congress to look into, and so a while back they did. They asked the Congressional Research Service, the non-partisan research organization in the Library of Congress, to investigate claims of Obama’s ineligibility. The full report is available on scribd: http://www.scribd.com/doc/41197555/41131059-MoC-Memo-What-to-Tell-Your-Constituents-in-Answer-to-Obama-Eligibility
It’s a very thorough and well-researched report, and concludes what pretty much everyone who has looked at the facts has said: there’s nothing to this. Obama is clearly a natural born citizen.
Steve-O, it always amazes me how you pro eligibility guys are always so far off the pace. All that memo was meant to to was to give Congressman Bilbray, a fervent anti-Constitutional Obama disciple, an argument to rebut persistent questioning from his electorate on the issue. It does not give any kind of balanced view of the matter and has long been dismissed as a politically partisan document that, counter to its main purpose, actually admits that nobody has ever vetted Obama for eligibility.
Here is just one of many sites that have shredded it in terms of credibility.
If you go to the link it is headed:
…and it crashed my internet…
“There’s a reason why some 90-odd cases have been dismissed. There is
no case against Obama.”
Gosh, I would think the editor of the New York Times would have better reading and comprehension skills than that. Most people know, and the article above points out once again, clearly and succinctly, that the core issue of Obama’s eligibility has never been tested in court. Every case has been dismissed on process matters.
I’ll quote it for you-
“Numerous lawsuits challenging Obama’s eligibility have been rejected by every court involved, including the Supreme Court of the United States. Some are still pending. The rejections have been based on various grounds, including the plaintiff’s lack of standing to sue and other specified and unspecified procedural grounds. No court has agreed to decide any of those suits on the merits.”
Lame Bill. Real lame. No wonder you’re going broke faster than a home heater salesman in Mexico.
Throughout history men of conquest have made it the first order of business upon victory to rape all the women. Why? Simply, so that all the young men born would have dual allegiences. The Framer’s understood this principle and wrote it into the Constitution as a “Natural Born Citizen”. Fathers nationality and mothers dictate the newborns REGARDLESS of the place of birth. If a young man is raised abroad and never hits the mainland USA until he is 17 years, does he understand “Main Street” Americans?
Pingback: Top American Baseballer Publicly Questions Obama’s Birth | TrueblueNZ
Why hasn’t Pelosi been investigated for vetting Obama herself when she removed the “constitution text” from the electoral college documents?
I don’t know the answer to that for sure, but I suspect it is because we are governed by criminals.
I actually did a post on that issue some time ago-
Its not Obama it is Soebarkah
Comments are closed.