Ten States (107 Electoral Votes) File Bills For Pres Candidates To Prove Eligibility

[goldcatt]

No doubt once the document is provided, they will say that it is a fake

That's where it gets interesting. Other than the goof in the Maine law on naturalized citizens, that kind of law would actually accept the documentation it is required to accept under Full Faith and Credit - the COLB. If the State of Maine tried to challenge it, HI would verify it.

Then you have a cage match between States in the courts, when HI sues Maine for dishonoring its legal documents in violation of Article 4 Section 1.

And as soon as anybody tries it, THAT will be the real fun.

 

[WorldWatcher]

They got something right.

Maine doesn't allow naturalized citizens to hold any elected office?

and actually, i dont see how that would violate any constitutional challenge
but then, Obama could easily satisfy that
his CoLB would qualify

It would fail because it's for all elected officials, but naturalized citizens may hold any office except the Presidency.

The States cannot exceed the constitutional qualifications for Federal offices.

Where does it state that naturalization papers are acceptable as proof of citizenship for all elected offices but POTUS?

Now it's my turn to say I should have read farther.




>>>>

 

[DiveCon]

It would fail because it's for all elected officials, but naturalized citizens may hold any office except the Presidency.

The States cannot exceed the constitutional qualifications for Federal offices.

Where does it state that naturalization papers are acceptable as proof of citizenship for all elected offices but POTUS?

thats covered

or other government-issued identification

That's in reference to the driver's license. It's the BC AND a DL or other ID. BC is Column A, DL or ID is Column B.

So you're right on the COLB, so long it's enforced properly.

But it would still fail, since under any normal statutory construction it disallows naturalized citizens from running for public offices other than President.

They're either very poor drafters, or it's again...all about Obama. So they forgot everything else.

no, it doesnt
it just requires proof of citizenship

 

[gekaap]

Actually, I was referring to a case from, I think, either VA or WV of local laws barring landlords from renting to non-documented immigrants, and dealing with local law enforcement conducting raids of work places that rely on large scale illegal immigration. Unfortunately I can't find anything on it so far, but I'll keep looking.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

What utter frauds you right-wingers are. Utter fucking frauds.

All you have is ignorance .. and because you KNOW that you have no fucking chance what-so-fucking-ever to beat Obama at the polls .. you desperately search for gimmicks and bullshit to do what you have no chance of doing otherwise.

... and oh yeah .. I didn't vote for Obama, don't even like him .. but I'm also not a goddamn fraud who believes he should be removed by gimmick.

Why does he work so hard to hide it and his records?

1. Because he doesn't have to pander to a bunch of lunatics who aren't going to believe anything they don't want to believe.

2. Because anyone who believes you can be President .. or Senator without having every orafice of your background thoroughly examined, checked, and checked again, can't be very smart.

3. Because the right making utter and complete fools of themselves whining about his birth certificate is in HIS best interest.

Why would he want the right to stop?

 

[goldcatt]

Actually, I was referring to a case from, I think, either VA or WV of local laws barring landlords from renting to non-documented immigrants, and dealing with local law enforcement conducting raids of work places that rely on large scale illegal immigration. Unfortunately I can't find anything on it so far, but I'll keep looking.

The Hazleton case! I know what you're talking about. That was relatively local for me.

But that was a 3d Circuit decision, not the Supremies. It's precedential but not nationwide. The petition for cert was just filed, I want to say in December....I'll have to look. I don't think it's been in conference for a decision on cert yet, they're still in filings. But here's the Circuit decision:

PDF Alert:

http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/073531p.pdf

 

[goldcatt]

thats covered



[/U]

That's in reference to the driver's license. It's the BC AND a DL or other ID. BC is Column A, DL or ID is Column B.

So you're right on the COLB, so long it's enforced properly.

But it would still fail, since under any normal statutory construction it disallows naturalized citizens from running for public offices other than President.

They're either very poor drafters, or it's again...all about Obama. So they forgot everything else.

no, it doesnt
it just requires proof of citizenship

Sorry, Dive. But you're wrong on this one.

Here's the full sentence they're proposing, it's identical in both sections but for the word "petition" being "primary" in the other.

A person who seeks nomination by petition shall show proof of United States citizenship in the form of a certified copy of the candidate's birth certificate and the candidate's driver's license or other government-issued identification to the Secretary of State.

HP0027, LD 34, item 1, An Act To Require Candidates for Public Office To Provide Proof of Citizenship

So a person needs to show:

a certified copy of the candidate's birth certificate

and

the candidate's driver's license or other government-issued identification

Everything before the "and" is read as one requirement, everything after the "and" is read as a separate requirement. That's standard statutory construction.

 

[goldcatt]

Here you go, gekaap. The petition for cert was filed on 12-8-10, according to their local paper.

Attorneys for the city on Dec. 8 filed a petition that asks the Supreme Court to hear Hazleton's case and ultimately settle discrepancies in lower court rulings over whether states and municipalities can take limited steps in assisting the federal government in enforcing immigration law.

Hazleton takes immigration fight to U.S. Supreme Court - News - Citizens Voice

 

[DiveCon]

That's in reference to the driver's license. It's the BC AND a DL or other ID. BC is Column A, DL or ID is Column B.

So you're right on the COLB, so long it's enforced properly.

But it would still fail, since under any normal statutory construction it disallows naturalized citizens from running for public offices other than President.

They're either very poor drafters, or it's again...all about Obama. So they forgot everything else.

no, it doesnt
it just requires proof of citizenship

Sorry, Dive. But you're wrong on this one.

Here's the full sentence they're proposing, it's identical in both sections but for the word "petition" being "primary" in the other.

A person who seeks nomination by petition shall show proof of United States citizenship in the form of a certified copy of the candidate's birth certificate and the candidate's driver's license or other government-issued identification to the Secretary of State.

HP0027, LD 34, item 1, An Act To Require Candidates for Public Office To Provide Proof of Citizenship

So a person needs to show:

a certified copy of the candidate's birth certificate

and

the candidate's driver's license or other government-issued identification

Everything before the "and" is read as one requirement, everything after the "and" is read as a separate requirement. That's standard statutory construction.

yes, i see that now
they need to amend it to include a copy of the naturalization papers

 

[USArmyRetired]

No doubt once the document is provided, they will say that it is a fake

That's where it gets interesting. Other than the goof in the Maine law on naturalized citizens, that kind of law would actually accept the documentation it is required to accept under Full Faith and Credit - the COLB. If the State of Maine tried to challenge it, HI would verify it.

Then you have a cage match between States in the courts, when HI sues Maine for dishonoring its legal documents in violation of Article 4 Section 1.

And as soon as anybody tries it, THAT will be the real fun.

Full faith and credit does not extend to fraudulently obtained documents and requires authentication.

 

[goldcatt]

No doubt once the document is provided, they will say that it is a fake

That's where it gets interesting. Other than the goof in the Maine law on naturalized citizens, that kind of law would actually accept the documentation it is required to accept under Full Faith and Credit - the COLB. If the State of Maine tried to challenge it, HI would verify it.

Then you have a cage match between States in the courts, when HI sues Maine for dishonoring its legal documents in violation of Article 4 Section 1.

And as soon as anybody tries it, THAT will be the real fun.

Full faith and credit does not extend to fraudulently obtained documents and requires authentication.

There you have it, Agit8r. They're looking to give us some taxpayer funded fun, fun, fun!

 

[goldcatt]

no, it doesnt
it just requires proof of citizenship

Sorry, Dive. But you're wrong on this one.

Here's the full sentence they're proposing, it's identical in both sections but for the word "petition" being "primary" in the other.

A person who seeks nomination by petition shall show proof of United States citizenship in the form of a certified copy of the candidate's birth certificate and the candidate's driver's license or other government-issued identification to the Secretary of State.

HP0027, LD 34, item 1, An Act To Require Candidates for Public Office To Provide Proof of Citizenship

So a person needs to show:

a certified copy of the candidate's birth certificate

and

the candidate's driver's license or other government-issued identification

Everything before the "and" is read as one requirement, everything after the "and" is read as a separate requirement. That's standard statutory construction.

yes, i see that now
they need to amend it to include a copy of the naturalization papers

Yep.

That's what happens when you let birfers write laws.

 

[DiveCon]

Sorry, Dive. But you're wrong on this one.

Here's the full sentence they're proposing, it's identical in both sections but for the word "petition" being "primary" in the other.



HP0027, LD 34, item 1, An Act To Require Candidates for Public Office To Provide Proof of Citizenship

So a person needs to show:

a certified copy of the candidate's birth certificate

and

the candidate's driver's license or other government-issued identification

Everything before the "and" is read as one requirement, everything after the "and" is read as a separate requirement. That's standard statutory construction.

yes, i see that now
they need to amend it to include a copy of the naturalization papers

Yep.

That's what happens when you let birfers write laws.

we dont know that this is a birfer law



yet

 

[goldcatt]

yes, i see that now
they need to amend it to include a copy of the naturalization papers

Yep.

That's what happens when you let birfers write laws.

we dont know that this is a birfer law



yet

If they were so focused on the birth certificate they forgot everything and everyone else?

That's a really, really dumb mistake. At least 2 of us on this thread caught it immediately, and as far as I know we're no lawmakers.

Okay, I'll give you temporary willing suspension of disbelief....but it hurts.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Texas is first?

Great.

The Republican Platform in Texas wants to make gays "felons".

TX GOP platform: Re-criminalize sodomy, make gay marriage a felony | Raw Story

In addition to this, the Texas GOP seeks to end the state's lottery, which provides millions in funding to public education; restrict citizenship to children born in the United States whose parents are citizens; end federal sponsorship of pre-kindergarten schools; impose a jail sentence on any illegal immigrant in the state; shut down all day-labor centers; cut off all bilingual education after a student's fourth year in a U.S. public school; legalize corporal punishment in public schools; mandate that evolution and global warming be "taught as challengeable scientific theory"; and demand that Congress evict the United Nations from U.S. soil and end American membership in the global body.

In spite of this, Texas Governor Rick Perry went out of his way to extol the virtues of Mexican-Americans and at one point even filled his convention stage with dozens of minorities, essentially using them as props to promote Republican tolerance.

------------------------------------

And now they are first among nutbags. Figures.

psst.. rdean... there is a difference between an illegal and an American of Mexican decent...

 

[SFC Ollie]

I see nothing wrong with a State making laws to follow the Constitution.

However if someone has a problem with it i would have to wonder why.....

I can tell you why.

Because the rest of the country isn't so stupid that they don't know what you're up to.

Oh please, do tell us what I'm up to.....

 

[candycorn]

What utter frauds you right-wingers are. Utter fucking frauds.

All you have is ignorance .. and because you KNOW that you have no fucking chance what-so-fucking-ever to beat Obama at the polls .. you desperately search for gimmicks and bullshit to do what you have no chance of doing otherwise.

... and oh yeah .. I didn't vote for Obama, don't even like him .. but I'm also not a goddamn fraud who believes he should be removed by gimmick.

How is filing a eligibility bill fraud?

I don't think fraud is the right word; someone said unconstitutional....that would be correct; federal law supercedes state laws in all matters. If a candidate passes muster with the US Constitution, state laws have no footing.