The Congressional Research Service, a division of the Library of Congress, is the research arm of the United States Congress. CRS legislative attorney Jack Maskell wrote a previously unpublished report in March of 2010, titled Birth Certificates of Presidential Candidates and Standing to Challenge Eligibility. Maskell’s previous report, Qualifications for Office of President of the United States and Legal Challenges to the Eligibility of a Candidate, was featured on this blog last year.
Clearly members of Congress were getting letters from constituents. Once again we see good research and sound conclusions from a qualified attorney such as:
Since the officially certified document [Obama’s 2008 Certification of Live Birth] is prima facie evidence of United States birth and citizenship, and there appears to be no actual documentary evidence of any nature to the contrary, such certificate would most likely deemed conclusive of “natural born” citizenship by a state official or court if any such review were commenced or required.
I was interested to learn that Congress has in the past refused to count Electoral College votes for an ineligible presidential candidate. We also learn what had been conjectured before, that no state requires a birth certificate from a presidential candidate.
Get the popcorn and enjoy:
Off-topic:
Doc, there’s a “new” (dated March 2010, but new to me) report by Jack Maskell of the Congressional Research Service, titled “Birth Certificates of Presidential Candidates and Standing to Challenge Eligibility.”.
Foggy, thanks for the link.
By the way, i fiind it quite unfair that Congress considered someone ineligible merely because they were dead. I mean the guy worked hard his whole life to rise to become President and then gets denied by the misfortune of his demise. I maintain that there have been at least a few Presidents who might have done better had they been dead while in office.
The article is a great summary of the salient arguments. I’d be curious to know which member(s) of Congress requested that the matter be looked into.
I agree with Scientist – there is NOTHING in the constitution which states specifically that a Presidential candidate must be alive – only that they be a Natural Born Citizen, 35 years of age, and lived in the U.S. for 14 years. One can be deceased and still have all of these qualifications.
To deny candidacy simply shows bias and prejudice against a group of citizens with ever-growing numbers.
Wow. that was a nice read. Thanks, doc.
Not sure if this has been posted by anyone, but here is a CRS Report on birthright citizenship from 2006. It’s not bad.
http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs9011/m1/1/high_res_d/RL33079_2006May12.pdf
Thanks, I’ve added this to the Citizenship bookmarks page:
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/bookmarks/citizenship/
(Remark: I am NOT writing what follows tongue in cheek)
I am not so sure you are right there:
“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 use of the present perfect “have lived” in present-day British English logically and grammatically implies that the person must still be alive when the eligibility is necessary, which is the moment when the electoral votes are cast in the various states.
1) I do not know whether the British English grammatical convention should be assumed as used by the writers of the US constitution. Today, some (but of course, not all) Americans would say ” I have done it this morning” even if it is long past noon. In any case, the House in 1872 that diregarded the votes for Harace Greeley from Georgia plainly interpreted the sentence I quoted as meaning that to be eligible, you need to be alive.
2) while it is obvious what would happen if the winning candidate died AFTER the electors voted, but BEFORE the counting of electoral votes in the House (the votes are counted and considered valid, the winning Vice Presidential candidate is declared President as the actual winner is incapacitated), it is unclear what would happen if the impossible occurred, i.e: the death of the winning Presidential candidate while electors are in the process of voting. Due to time zones and ignorance of the death, some electors may have voted for the “winning” President and some for his running mate. If the House could not or did not want to re-adjust the votes to give a majority to the winning ticket (which is probably what public opinion would want or at least expect to happen) this could throw the election into the same House, where there may be a different majority – conflict of interests, anyone?
Not really the US House of Reprentatives, but on November 17, 1864 the Confederate House with a 75 to 0 vote expelled its Alabama member William Cobb for treason. It seems most House members knew very well that Cobb had died on November 1st, but those who knew decided that such a little detail should not let Cobb escape the ignominy to Southern honor of being branded a Unionist.
OK, that “have lived” is not literally in the text, but the text says both “have attained to the age…” and “have been a resident” – both the main meanings of the verb “to live” (to lead a life and to inhabit) – they wrote it like that on purpose.
Oooops!
Kenyan MP James Orengo asked the nation’s parliament, “How could a young man born here in Kenya, who is not even a native American, become the president of America?”
On the day after Obama’s election, MP Boni Khalwale asked fellow members, “Could we allow … a Motion for Adjournment so that we could also continue the celebrations of having a Kenyan ruling the USA?”
Gee, that’s funny. The Irish prime minister recently said that President Obama’s home was Ireland, and the president himself said that he had “come home to Ireland.”
MichaelN – how many US Senators and members of the US House of Representatives voted for the Senate Resolution and for the House Resolution that declared Hawaii to be the birth place of President Obama?
And did you know that President Reagan was the first foreign born President?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:President_Reagan_in_Ballyporeen_Ireland.jpg
MichaelN- please list what you know about Kenyan MP James Orengo and why you hold his opinions in such high regard. Please explain why he is more credible than the entire Government of Hawaii.
Don’t forget to list and link to whatever documentation he supplied to prove his claims!
And your point is?
“for if enemies should come into the realm, and possess a town or fort, and have issue there,”
“for if enemies should come into the realm, and possess a town or fort, and have issue there,”
Werd…. 😎
Hearsay. Whatever.
Whatever.
Reagan said that trees cause more pollution than cars. And we know that if someone, somewhere, said it, it must be true!
Wait, Michael will soon bring up the newspapers which wrote that Obama was Kenyan-born. James Orengo did not know the difference between Kenyan-born and Kenya-born. I wonder if MichaelN does.