IS THE POLITICAL QUESTION DOCTRINE VIABLE AS A MEANS TO EVADE COMPLIANCE WITH UNVARIABLE STANDARDS?
Fundamentally, this case comes down to a single bifurcated question: (1A) does the constitution mean what it says when it lays down absolute parameters, such as the age and citizenship qualifications to be President, and (1B) to whom does the investigation and enforcement of this constitutional provision: to the Congress, the People, or can the President get by merely asserting his qualifications without presenting evidence which would be competent as Summary Judgment (admissible) evidence under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure? The Plaintiffs have brought their complaint as a matter of first impression to ask this Court to determine, find, hold, and rule that the investigation and enforcement of this right belongs to the people, even members of a discrete and insular minority of the people, even if this group lacks majoritarian political power. Plaintiffs respond to the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and ask this Court to rule, pursuant to the First and Ninth Amendments
