I have avoided posting on the lawsuits seeking to prove that our current President does not meet the Constitutional requirement of natural-born citizenship to hold his office. Just because we are entering a holiday weekend, I thought I would look at things. I did not go through the interminable legal proceedings, but lay out below the main considerations. I conclude, not to keep readers in suspense, that Barack Obama is fully qualified to serve as president. But let us walk things through just once, if only to draw lessons for future campaigns on how to nip controversy in the bud.
Citizenship. On the cusp of America's 233rd birthday, there is now on eBay a seller offering what he says is a certified Kenyan birth certificate for Barack Hussein Obama II, dated 7:24 PM on August 4, 1961. The U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section I, contains in Clause 4 the Presidential Eligibility Clause, which reads:
No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
The leading Supreme Court citizenship case is United States v. Kim Wong Ark (1898); the Wiki entry on Kim Wong Ark lays out complex questions. (I lack the time or patience to wade through what reportedly is a cumbersome majority opinion, especially as its holding sheds no light on the Obama case.)
The citizenship discussion at U.S. Constitution Online spells out Congress has by statute defined who is a natural-born citizen of the United States, in Title 8 U.S.C, sec. 1401. (That entry notes that questions were also raised as to John McCain, born in 1936 in the Panama Canal Zone; but there is no dispute as to where McCain was born.) Either subsection (c) or (d) or (g) covers Barack Obama's parents--I have lost track of the peregrinations of his mom in the years prior to his birth. Title 8 U.S.C. 1405 makes those born in Hawaii after April 30, 1900 United States citizens at birth. Hawaii was admitted the the Union on August 21, 1959 as the 50th state. As PolitiFact.com explains, the State of Hawaii allows only family members to request a certified original copy of a birth certificate. The State's rationale is to protect familial privacy.
Which brings us to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) candidate filing requirements. FEC Form 2 Statement of Candidacy requesting bare-bones data. Playing the Candidate Registration Information PowerPoint presentation yields no additional information. Thus, there appears to be no requirement that the federal agency charged with supervising elections verify the citizenship of Presidential aspirants. American Independent Party Presidential candidate Alan Keyes filed suit in California on Nov. 14, 2008, 10 days after the election, demanding proof of citizenship before then-Senator Obama took office.
Law Meets Politics. Two legal problems face any challenger: (1) standing to bring suit; (2) mootness--it may be too late to bring suit. Re first, clearly the average voter does not qualify, as to bring a lawsuit the plaintiff must have suffered unique injury. Re second, time for challenge was before Jan. 20. Practical politics are that no Democrat would dare challenge for fear of alienating core black voters. GOP had less fear of that, but greater fear of facing Hillary, so why challenge? So the only way this could come to pass is if iron-clad proof is dug up, and the certificate makes it into as establishment press organ like the Washington Post or LA Times (NY Times will not touch it). Then the moot issue resurfaces, with the legal question being whether an eligibility defect is curable by acceptance of service in office.
The problem could have been fixed long ago, had Congress required every candidate declaring for President to file with the Federal Election Commission either an original certificate of birth or a certified copy of the original. Failure to present legal proof would then disqualify a candidate. Still, if the press published stuff showing Obama somehow ineligible, who would stand up and push our first African-American President over the side? Joe Biden? Not if he is hoping for a second term? John McCain? There is no machinery for calling a special Presidential election. And if there was, would new nominations be made? Perhaps McCain would have a right to run again, but could Hillary-re-emerge and take the spot from Biden? Likely, Biden steps in. But only if he does not push Barack over the side. In all, a fine mess indeed.
Team Obama's Proof. On June 13, 2008 President Obama's campaign released this photocopy of the candidate's Hawaii birth certificate. The embossed seal & registrar's signature go on the back of Hawaii birth certificates. FightSmears.com is a website devoted to responding to accusations about Obama & his family. PolitiFact dispatches conspiracy theories:
If this document is forged, a U.S. senator and his presidential campaign have perpetrated a vast, long-term fraud. They have done it with conspiring officials at the Hawaii Department of Health, the Cook County (Ill.) Bureau of Vital Statistics, the Illinois Secretary of State's office, the Attorney Registration & Disciplinary Commission of the Supreme Court of Illinois and many other government agencies....
And there's the rub. It is possible that Obama conspired his way to the precipice of the world's biggest job, involving a vast network of people and government agencies over decades of lies. Anything's possible.
But step back and look at the overwhelming evidence to the contrary and your sense of what's reasonable has to take over.
There is not one shred of evidence to disprove PolitiFact's conclusion that the candidate's name is Barack Hussein Obama, or to support allegations that the birth certificate he released isn't authentic.
And that's true no matter how many people cling to some hint of doubt and use the Internet to fuel their innate sense of distrust.
Bottom Line. There are lessons to be drawn here. First, the Federal Election Commission should require a certified copy--both sides--of any candidate's birth certificate to be filed with Candidate Form 2. Second, it is easy to dismiss conspiracy theorists, and no doubt there will be such types no matter what is filed at the FEC. But demanding a formal filing proving candidate birth by original or certified copy of same is a simple formality that as a matter of principle should be required. It is the way the country's candidate selection business should be conducted--at least, for high office.
As for conspiracies, it is easy to laugh. But consider this June 18, 2004 Fox News posting reporting that 40 years after JFK's murder a majority of Americans believe there was a conspiracy & cover-up, according to an OpinionDynamics poll conducted in October 2003. By 66-25 Americans believed then that there was a conspiracy, and by 74-14 they believe that there was a cover-up. There is no reason to think results today would be any different. However one feels, there is little doubt that better handling of matters then would have produced a more widely accepted report.
It was a simpler time then, before events from JFK through Watergate produced the corrosive skepticism of today. Thus I give folks a generation ago a pass for errors committed. But today, there is no excuse for careless procedures. A simple candidate filing procedure requiring submission of formal proof for candidates seeking high office would keep to a minimum questions that might arise as to eligibility of candidates who have filed.
Comments