on what planet https://t.co/SobM182Yh4— George Conway (@gtconway3d) August 13, 2020
Oh, wait! He said "nominated." Hell, that wouldn't surprise me at all. Especially if Trump can find a a university hack like the one who argued Kamala Harris is not a natural born citizen.* So, yes, he could be "nominated."
The Norwegian Nobel Committee is responsible for selecting the Nobel Peace Prize Laureates. A nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize may be submitted by any persons who are qualified to nominate.
Qualified nominators
According to the statutes of the Nobel Foundation, a nomination is considered valid if it is submitted by a person who falls within one of the following categories:
Members of national assemblies and national governments (cabinet members/ministers) of sovereign states as well as current heads of states
Members of The International Court of Justice in The Hague and The Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague
Members of l’Institut de Droit International
Members of the international board of the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom
University professors, professors emeriti and associate professors of history, social sciences, law, philosophy, theology, and religion; university rectors and university directors (or their equivalents); directors of peace research institutes and foreign policy institutes
Persons who have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize
Members of the main board of directors or its equivalent of organizations that have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize
Current and former members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee (proposals by current members of the Committee to be submitted no later than at the first meeting of the Committee after 1 February)
Former advisers to the Norwegian Nobel Committee
Unless otherwise stated the term members shall be understood as current (sitting) members.
Candidacy criteria
The candidates eligible for the Nobel Peace Prize are those persons or organizations nominated by qualified individuals, see above. A nomination for yourself will not be taken into consideration.
Heavy emphasis on "could be."
*I read his argument, and reviewed the Ark decision. He rejects Ark, arguing it only applies to parents who are "residents" (a term not used anywhere in the Constitution and not argued in Ark, or considered important to the conclusion) and anything else establishing jus soli from the Ark decision is "dicta." I can only say Professor Eastman has a very expansive definition of "dicta" which is not followed by any other court I am aware of. And his reading of Ark is so far out of the mainstream as to render it ludicrous, to boot.
No comments:
Post a Comment