Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Quickie: The Birthers’ Next Target: Hillary Clinton?

Stephanie Mencimer in Mother Jones asks “The Birthers’ Next Target: Hillary Clinton?”Quick excerpt below: 

Ever since Barack Obama started running for the White House, he’s been plagued by lawsuits from detractors who claim that he is not a natural-born citizen, and thus is ineligible to serve as president. Now the devoted conspiracy theorists of the so-called "eligibility movement" have a fresh target: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. And there’s a chance that the Supreme Court might hear their challenge.

In January 2009, a longtime foreign service officer named David C. Rodearmel sued Hillary Clinton in federal court in DC arguing that an obscure provision of the Constitution blocks her from serving in Obama's Cabinet because of her previous stint in the US Senate. This argument isn’t as nutty as those used in the numerous lawsuits disputing Obama’s citizenship—in fact, it previously prevented Orrin Hatch from becoming a Supreme Court justice.
Rodearmel himself says he’s just doing his best to protect the Constitution, although he's no stranger to conservative political causes: In 2004, he donated $250 to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. And he’s supported by some familiar Clinton antagonists, namely the conservative legal group Judicial Watch, which filed numerous suits against both Hillary and Bill Clinton when they occupied the White House. His quest has also been cheered on by WorldNetDaily, the leading online promoter of the birthers’ cause, who seem eager to open up a new front in the "eligibility" fight. 

Read the whole thing here.  I hope the SCOTUS wrap this thing up quickly. I hate for this to last all the way to 2012, and then who knows -- start over again?!  

Related Posts:


Federale said...

So, obscure parts of the Constitution can safely be ignored? Or just ignored by Democrats? Or just ignored by the Clinton machine? Or the Daley machine?

Consul-At-Arms said...

This kind of thing has come up before; usually it's solved by having the office holder take the salary as it existed before they voted a pay raise for the position.