FL – Voeltz v Obama – Final Opposition
Voeltz explains why it will fail
Under either scenario, it is clear that Defendant Obama has not established eligibility for the Office of the President of the United States, and it is evident that he may not, under any circumstance, establish his eligibility.
First of all Obama has no legal requirement to establish his eligibility, that’s an issue for Congress. Furthermore, the suggestion that his birth to a foreign father, even though on native soil, renders him ineligible has been rejected by various courts based on the precedent of US v Wong Kim Ark.
It’s too late, and lacks in anything that would convince a court that they have standing. Still, it’s quite readable, has relevant precedential rulings.
As to the citations:
State ex rel. Shevin v. Stone, 279 So. 2d 17
State ex rel. Cherry v. Stone, 265 So. 2d 56, 58
None of them address the issue of a Presidential election since the eligibility requirements are for the electors not the President, whose eligibility is determined by Congress.
Comments are closed.
All of it, of course, beside the point since Obama has in fact established his eligibility while no previous president ever had.
Over at OBC they have posted the defense’s notice of “APPLICABILITY OF TITLE 3 U.S.C. 5″ and the plaintiff’s response.