...I don't think Taitz has read the actual text of SB 91....

The candidates shall further be required to provide proof of identity and United States citizenship to the State Election Board. A candidate shall present a current state or federal government-issued photo identification to provide proof of identity, and shall also present one of the following documents to provide proof of United States natural-born citizenship:
1. An original birth document issued by a state, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or the District of Columbia, or a certified copy thereof;

Looks like the COLB works here.

Looks like the COLB works here.

1. An[highlight] original birth document[/highlight] issued by a state, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or the District of Columbia, or a certified copy thereof;

2. An [highlight]original birth certificate[/highlight] issued by the federal government, or a certified copy thereof;

Thanks WD -- and, yes, that's my feeling too. Is there any real dispute about it?

Thanks WD -- and, yes, that's my feeling too. Is there any real dispute about it?

B. The Secretary of the State Election Board shall promulgate rules to specify the documentation required to provide proof of eligibility to hold the office sought. The requirement to provide proof of identity may be satisfied by production of a document specified in Section 7-114 of Title 26 of the Oklahoma Statutes.

C. Copies of documents provided pursuant to the provisions of this section shall be made by the election board and kept available for public inspection pursuant to the Oklahoma Open Records Act.

SECTION 2. AMENDATORY 26 O.S. 2001, Section 20-102, as amended by Section 24, Chapter 485, O.S.L. 2003 (26 O.S. Supp. 2010, Section 20-102), is amended to read as follows:

Section 20-102. A. Candidates for the nomination for President of the United States shall file with the Secretary of the State Election Board. Such candidates shall be members of political parties recognized under the laws of the State of Oklahoma and shall have filed a statement of candidacy with the Federal Election Commission and shall have raised and expended not less than Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) for said the office. The candidates shall be required to swear an oath or affirm that they meet the aforementioned qualifications, and their signatures shall be witnessed by a notary public. The candidates shall further be required to provide proof of identity and United States citizenship to the State Election Board. A candidate shall present a current state or federal government-issued photo identification to provide proof of identity, and shall also present one of the following documents to provide proof of United States natural-born citizenship:

1. An original birth document issued by a state, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or the District of Columbia, or a certified copy thereof;

2. An original birth certificate issued by the federal government, or a certified copy thereof;

3. An original United States Certificate of Birth Abroad, or certified copy thereof; or

4. An original Report of Birth Abroad of a Citizen of the United States, or certified copy thereof.
Copies of these documents shall be made by the State Election Board and kept available for public inspection pursuant to the Oklahoma Open Records Act.

President Obama can meet the requirements of this new law with his COLB but Trump can't. (Can Mitt or Pawlenty?) Trump's COLB wasn't issued by the State of New York but one of its cities.
...

President Obama can meet the requirements of this new law with his COLB but Trump can't. (Can Mitt or Pawlenty?) Trump's COLB wasn't issued by the State of New York but one of its cities.

Not very carefully thought out. Another attempt to solve a problem that doesn't exist, while striking out at a political foe. This is how bad laws are made.

This law is about what I Imagined that you would have in the US before I became involved with the conspiracy theories and met all you fine people. I had always thought that there were laws dealing with how you prove NBC and was surprised to learn that there weren't.
The problems are that only candidates from a recognised political party can stand for the office of president and the presidents qualifications are set out with the relevant documents but that does seem a bit vague.
It does seem that this is a sop to the birthers and watch them go off when it has no effect on President Obama.
Regards ..........Dick

Poutine,
Thanks for that mate, I have heard what you said on several occasions and I was only saying what my perceptions were. What is usual now, in my experience, is that when something is mentioned in an act or constitution it is later defined in the act's appendices or is defined in further legislation. I realise that the constitution was written in much earlier times and people were much more concerned with establishing a young country. They didn't always take time to dot the i or cross the t. Here as well as there!
Regards ...........Dick

I think Trump would be okay, actually. New York state law explicitly authorizes New York City to issue birth certificates in lieu of the state. I perused New York's statutes on the issue and am too lazy to engage in a full analysis of them, but the gist of their effect is to allow the state to issue BC's, and also New York City, and also separate registration districts as the Commissioner deems fit. In short, a BC issued by New York City is effectively a BC issued by New York State.

But the New York State website says literally they do not [highlight]issue[/highlight] copies of birth certificates from New York City.

By the way, there was some dicussion on New York City BCs recently at Doc's place. A birfer found out that a notary in 2007 advised people born in New York City (but not State) who wanted to marry in France to get themselves a long-form birth certificate before handing it in for an apostille. In birfers' minds that of course means that only long-form birth certificates will get you married in France and that the Hawaii "short-form" cannot even be apostilled. In reality, the 2007 short-form City BC probably did not mention the full names of the parents (if that notary was on the level, and was NOT asking for long forms because he had always been asking for long forms - and long forms take more time to translate, upping the bill)

On April 1st, the State Department changed the rules for obtaining US passports. You need the full names now on the BC. If New York City did not change its "short-form" to accommodate for that, does that mean the Donald cannot get a passport with his present BC?

In the 224 years of our Constitution's existence, it's never been a controversy. The last legitimate controversy was probably McCain, and Congress passed a resolution expressing its opinion by unanimous vote that he was a natural born citizen regardless of what the facts of his birth are.

By the way, there was some dicussion on New York City BCs recently at Doc's place. A birfer found out that a notary in 2007 advised people born in New York City (but not State) who wanted to marry in France to get themselves a long-form birth certificate before handing it in for an apostille. In birfers' minds that of course means that only long-form birth certificates will get you married in France and that the Hawaii "short-form" cannot even be apostilled. In reality, the 2007 short-form City BC probably did not mention the full names of the parents (if that notary was on the level, and was NOT asking for long forms because he had always been asking for long forms - and long forms take more time to translate, upping the bill)

On April 1st, the State Department changed the rules for obtaining US passports. You need the full names now on the BC. If New York City did not change its "short-form" to accommodate for that, does that mean the Donald cannot get a passport with his present BC?

xxx-http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=21046#comments

B. The Secretary of the State Election Board shall promulgate rules to specify the documentation required to provide proof of eligibility to hold the office sought. The requirement to provide proof of identity may be satisfied by production of a document specified in Section 7-114 of Title 26 of the Oklahoma Statutes.

§26-7-114. Procedure for determining eligibility.

A. ...“proof of identity” shall mean a document that satisfies all of the following:
1. The document shows the name of the person to whom the document was issued, and the name substantially conforms to the name in the precinct registry;
2. The document shows a photograph of the person to whom the document was issued;
3. The document includes an expiration date, which is after the date of the election in which the person is appearing to vote. The provisions of this paragraph shall not apply to an identification card issued to a person sixty-five (65) years of age or older which is valid indefinitely, as provided in Section 6-105.3 of Title 47 of the Oklahoma Statutes; and
4. The document was issued by the United States, the State of Oklahoma or the government of a federally recognized Indian tribe or nation.

I got a NYC short form sometime in 2001. At least then, the short form included the full names of both parents.