By JB Williams
The Supreme Court of the United States of America has but one primary obligation to the American people, and that obligation is to use the power afforded it under Article III – Section I of the Constitution, to uphold, protect and preserve the U.S. Constitution, the Charters of Freedom, and provide equal justice for all, without regard to personal political leanings or ambitions.
The founders stated very simply, “The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.
Article II – Section I establishes who is eligiable to run for President of the United States, “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.”
Respected author and journalist Joan Swirsky, chronicles the numerous legal challenges to Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility in her November 24th column, The Great Birth Certificate Scandal-Cover-Up of the 2008 Election. A story buried by the entire American press corps for months now, in their effort to seat their “global messiah.”
As Swirsky states in her column, “Leo C. Donofrio a retired attorney, started a website (supporting link) and filed a suit in New Jersey on November 3, asking Secretary of State, Nina Mitchell Wells, for an emergency stay prohibiting Obama, Sen. McCain, and Socialist Worker’s Party candidate Roger Calero, from appearing on New Jersey’s ballot, claiming all three are not “natural born citizens.” On Nov. 6, Supreme Court Justice David Souter denied Donofrio’s application. But the case has now entered the docket of the U.S. Supreme Court and Justice Clarence Thomas has decided to send it to conference on December 5th! This means that only 10 days before the Electoral College votes, the nine Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court will meet privately to discuss Donofrio’s case.”
As of this writing, December 6th, the Supreme Court has not yet announced whether or not it will take up the Donofrio case, or any other case concerning Obama’s constitutional eligibility for the office of President.
Yet there is no more important issue before the court today and the clock is ticking.
Upholding the Constitution
After the “hanging chad” debacle of 2000, the court is undoubtedly reluctant to weigh in on the eligibility of a presidential candidate which, appears to have won the 2008 general election by more than a 7 million vote margin. But he is not elected until he is elected by the Electoral College.
He is not president until he is sworn into office by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, despite his efforts to create unconstitutional power in the nonexistent office of “President-Elect.”
However, the court is not bound by public popularity. It is instead bound by it’s obligation to protect, defend and uphold the U.S. Constitution and allowing an ineligible candidate to be sworn into the highest office in the land would be the greatest affront to constitutional law in U.S. history. It would be a complete failure of the court, not to mention a complete failure of the Constitutional Republic as a whole.
If the Supreme Court refuses to take up the issue of Obama’s eligibility, which is indeed in reasonable doubt as evidenced by numerous legal challenges filed across the country, the court will be demonstrating that when push comes to shove, they are not willing to execute their primary function of upholding the people’s charters of freedom. They will have rendered themselves irrelevant.
Beyond any Reasonable Doubt
On the other hand, it is in the best interest of the nation, the court, the people’s charters of freedom and even the incoming Obama administration, to settle the issue of Obama’s constitutional eligibility before allowing the Electoral College to cast votes for a candidate whose fundamental eligibility is in such serious doubt.
Make no mistake, Obama supporters have been quite clear about their position on the matter. They do not care whether or not Obama is constitutionally eligible for the office he seeks. The fact is, Obama supporters have demonstrated throughout the campaign that they are not in the least impressed by facts, laws, or the constitution. They want what they want, even when they don’t know what that is, and don’t know if it’s even legal or not.
But the rule of constitutional law must prevail regardless of political ambitions, because the republic itself will fall without the rule of constitutional law.
If I were Obama, or even an Obama supporter, I would want no such cloud hanging over my administration. The notion that Obama can unite the nation is beyond silly when half of the nation believes he is wholly ineligible even to seek the office of president.
It’s quite telling that the average Obama supporter is willing to grant the court the authority to alienate the unalienable rights to Life, Liberty and Happiness, but accuses the court of “overstepping its boundaries” any time the court steps in to uphold the constitution, as it did in the 2000 election debacle.
The court has a fundamental obligation to uphold the constitution without political bias. It has failed to meet this obligation several times in the past, at great cost to the American people and their republic. But this time, if the court fails to meet its primary obligation, the court will render the entire foundation of this nation moot.
If the constitutional requirements for the highest office in the land are no longer to be upheld, nothing in the constitution is to be upheld. The entire document will be rendered no more valuable than an outhouse copy of a Sears catalogue.
Rumor has it that the Supreme Court of the United States will announce its intentions regarding the Obama eligibility matter sometime Monday the 8th. For the sake of the constitutional republic itself, I hope they make the right decision.
I dare not imagine the state of the union without its constitutional foundation.
Obama could have ended this discussion at any time over the last two years, by simply offering the “transparency” he based his campaign rhetoric upon. He has instead, spent over a half-million dollars in legal fees attempting to subvert the constitution and run the clock out before facing the matter.
As a result, the Supreme Court is now in the uncomfortable position of being the last line of defense and it must act to protect and uphold the constitution, or there will be nothing left to protect and defend from hereafter.
A Matter of Precedent
As the high court now has a long history of “making law” via judicial activism and precedent setting by way of court decisions, it is vital to America’s future that the correct precedent be established in the Obama eligibility for office case.
Imagine a Supreme Court precedent that allows any citizen of any foreign nation to hold the office of President of the United States. This matter is much bigger than Barack Obama and the ultimate outcome of the 2008 election.
By its actions (or inaction) in the pending Obama cases, the court will establish one of two precedents.
- The constitutional requirements for President must be upheld even in the case of Barack Hussein Obama and his 66 million supporters…
- Or, it can not be used to prevent a President Soros or Ahmadinejad in the future.
In short, the U.S. Constitution either matters today, or it doesn’t matter ever again.
That’s what the Obama case is all about and this is why the Supreme Court must decide whether it is a court of politically motivated public opinion, or a court of equal justice under Constitutional Law.
The Constitution applies to Obama, or it applies to nobody.
http://www.jb-williams.com/ “If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace.” – Thomas Paine, The American Crisis, No. 1, December 19, 1776