Native and Natural Born Citizenship Explored (Re-opened for limited business)

A set of interesting lawsuits were filed in various states, challenging the Constitutionality of a sitting Senator to run for President or Vice President

The cases are as follows:

• Alabama was filed as case 08-1906 in Montgomery County Circuit Court.
• Indiana was filed as 49D10-0812-PL-055511 in Marion Superior Court.
• Georgia was filed. (waiting for case number and copy of complaint).
• Michigan was filed as case 08-140-MM.
• Illinois was filed as case 2008-MR-000736.

I have yet to find any more data on them beyond the Indiana lawsuit which I am tracking under Ankeny v Governor of Indiana

Although the issue is certainly moot and the plaintiffs’ lack standing and remedy, there is an interesting argument here in which the plaintiffs (who are appearing Pro Se) seem to be claiming that on November 4, Senator Obama was elected Elector-in-Chief even though at the time of this election, he was not included on the official list of electors.

Remember that the people do not vote for a President but rather for an elector, who gets to elect the president. Because of some poorly argued reason, the Plaintiffs seem to believe that the voters actually voted for Obama and McCain as Electors-in-Chief but I fail to see any supporting evidence other than an assertion that “what else happened on November 4th?” Perhaps the plaintiffs believe that since the ballot only mentioned Obama or McCain that this meant that the voters were voting directly for what they seem to define as a ‘Elector-In-Chief”. If that is the case, then they seem to misunderstand election law.

I predict that the suit, which is rumored to be part of a set of 5 suits filed across they US (I have yet to find any others), will be dismissed by granting the Motion to Dismiss by the defendants.

And what happened on 01-06-2009?

INDIANAPOLIS – Eleven Democratic Hoosier Electoral College members cast their votes for President Elect Barack Obama in the Indiana House Chambers Monday morning. The votes will officially be tabulated on Jan. 6 in Washington, D.C., the final electoral hurdle for the Illinois Democrat prior to his Jan. 20 inauguration.

When at 10:35 a.m. Secretary of State Todd Rokita told about 300 people in the chambers, “Eleven votes have been cast and all 11 have been cast for Barack Obama,” thunderous applause erupted in the chamber. It was the first time since 1964 that a Democrat had won Indiana’s Electoral College votes.

The 11 electors then cast their votes for Joe Biden as vice president.

Source: Howey Politics Indiana

There is a confusion as to the nature of the short ballot versus ‘general ticket’. In the former, voters elect the entire slate of electors, while in the latter, voters vote for a particular elector.

Before the advent of the short ballot in the early twentieth century, as described above, the most common means of electing the presidential electors was through the general ticket. The general ticket is quite similar to the current system and is often confused with it. In the general ticket, voters cast ballots for individuals running for presidential elector (while in the short ballot, voters cast ballots for an entire slate of electors). In the general ticket, the state canvass would report the number of votes cast for each candidate for elector, a complicated process in states like New York with multiple positions to fill. Both the general ticket and the short ballot are often considered at-large or winner-takes-all voting. The short ballot was adopted by the various states at different times; it was adopted for use by North Carolina and Ohio in 1932. Alabama was still using the general ticket as late as 1960 and was one of the last states to switch to the short ballot.

Source: Wikipedia

And

The question of the extent to which state constitutions may constrain the legislature’s choice of a method of choosing electors has been touched on in two U.S. Supreme Court cases. In McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U.S. 1 (1892), the Court cited Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 which states that a state’s electors are selected “in such manner as the legislature thereof may direct” and wrote that these words “operat[e] as a limitation upon the state in respect of any attempt to circumscribe the legislative power.” In Bush v. Palm Beach County Canvassing Board, 531 U.S. 70 (2000), a Florida Supreme Court decision was vacated (not reversed) based on McPherson. On the other hand, three dissenting justices in Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000), wrote: “nothing in Article II of the Federal Constitution frees the state legislature from the constraints in the State Constitution that created it.”^[30]

Source: Wikipedia

MARION COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
IN THE STATE OF INDIANA
Steve Ankeny and Bill Kruse,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF INDIANA
Democratic National Committee, Barack Obama
Republican National Committee, John McCain
Defendants

Case No.
PETITION FOR EXTRAORDINARY WRIT OF PROHIBITION

(more…)

IN THE MARION SUPERIOR COURT
STATE OF INDIANA
COUNTY OF MARION

STEVE ANKENY and BILL KRUSE,
Plaintiffs,
v.
GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF INDIANA, DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE, BARAK OBAMA, REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE, JOHN McCAIN,
Defendants.

CAUSE NO. 49DlO-0812-PL-055511 )

DEFENDANT, GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF INDIANA’S MOTION TO DISMISS

(more…)

(pdf)

IN THE MARION SUPERIOR COURT
STATE OF INDIANA
COUNTY OF MARION

STEVE ANKENY and BILL
KRUSE,
Plaintiffs,

v.

GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF INDIANA, DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE, BARAK OBAMA, REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE, JOHN McCAIN,

Defendants.

CAUSE NO. 49DI0-0812-PL-055511 )

DEFENDANT, GOVERNOR OF INDIANA’S MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS

(more…)

IN THE STATE OF INDIANA
MARION COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
Steve Ankeny and Bill Kruse,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF INDIANA
Democratic National Committee, Barack Obama
Republican National Committee, John McCain
Defendants

Case No.  49D10-0812-PL-055511

PLAINTIFFS’ OPPOSITION TO GOVERNOR’S MOTION TO DISMISS

(more…)