I recant on Who is whom but what of Who is him?

Though I was able to defend a case for who's whom based on parallelism, others insist on the correctness of who's who. I accept that the latter form is fine, based on the analogy of Who is he?. Even so we can find a place for both Who am I? and Who is me, as in "The 'who' you are talking about is me."

Though the form Who is he? is accepted, I suggest it harks back to Elizabethan English, when use of he was routine for the passive object of a sentence.

Consider, Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. But, these days, we should say, Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.