[Danae]

Game on.

Malihi made some serious errors. I wonder if the Judges in chambers meeting before the actual hearing was recorded? Was there a court reporter in the room??

:0

Me thinks that Malihi is well aware his ruling is not going to stand. The appeal will shred his decision.

[Danae]

Ping to the usual subjects.

It seems like the other threads are getting rather long. SO I chose to post this story which confirms that Hatfield at least is going to appeal.

:)

[Tucker39]

An honest question: This Mark Hatfield........there used to be a senator from Oregon by that name......a rather decent fellow, but with about the same size stones as Lindsey Grahamnesty when it comes to hardnosed justice. This wouldn’t be HIM would it?

[Fred Nerks]

thanks for the ping, Lucy, did you see this?

[SvenMagnussen]

Hatfield commentary on appeal.

Notes for appeal:

Appellate review, based as it is upon the written record assembled at the trial level, is often deferential, particularly with regard to discretionary trial management decisions, issues heavily intertwined with fact and testimonial credibility, and the trier of fact's determination of guilt. Review of the trial court's elaboration of legal standards is generally de novo, and many jurisdictions also review de novo the application of constitutional or other legal standards to the facts (e.g., Ornelas v. United States, 517 U.S. 690, 699 (1996)).

When a question of law is at issue, as here, we owe no deference to the trial court's ruling and apply the “plain legal error” standard of review.  Glover v. Ware, 236 Ga.App. 40, 45(3), 510 S.E.2d 895 (1999).   Moreover, “[w]here it is apparent that a trial court's judgment rests on an erroneous legal theory, an appellate court cannot affirm.  [Cit.]” Gwinnett County v. Davis, 268 Ga. 653, 655, 492 S.E.2d 523 (1997).   This is such a case.   See Wood v. Dan P. Holl & Co., 169 Ga.App. 839, 841(2), 315 S.E.2d 51 (1984).

[Hotlanta Mike]

Atty. Van Irion to Appeal Judge Malihi’s Decision: Court Ignored Basic Rules of Interpretation

“The one point of good news from this ruling is that we have FINALLY gotten a court to rule on the merits of our argument. This may seem like a hollow victory, but it isn’t. Before this everyone that has brought a challenge against Obama’s eligibility has been dismissed on procedural grounds. Nothing is more devastating to the rule of law than a judicial branch that refuses to do its job. Before this case we had courts across the country telling Americans that they had no right to enforce the Constitution. That was absurdity at its most extreme. Liberty Legal Foundation found a case that we believed would at least get a ruling on the merits. We hate the ruling we got, but at least we got a ruling. Now we can appeal that ruling. The appeals process now will focus on the definition of “natural born citizen” rather than procedure for the first time since the issue of Obama’s eligibility was raise in 2008.”

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2012/02/attorney-van-irion-to-appeal-judge.html

[Elle Bee]

it is important to remember that here we have a jurist, Malihi, who deliberately and consciously issued a decision of which he was aware was contrary to the facts and law before him

That judges believe they can continue this with impunity is at the core of the failure of our our judicial system

.

[SteveH]

"the Judge has a record of placing the burden on the candidate, but didn't do so in this case."

So...

Was it a personal threat?

The prospect of widespread rioting?

Or a roundabout method to get it to SCOTUS faster?

[Ancesthntr]

I think it likely that the judge was strongly pressured (i. e. threatened - we are dealing with the thugs from Chicago, who doubtless include the mob) to decide for Obama. His decision was so contrary settled law that it guaranteed an appeal - and since he ruled on the merits, that it what will be the subject of the appeal. Rather brilliant, actually. He may turn out to be one of the great unsung heroes of this entire sordid affair. Not all participants in a battle operate in the open.

So I hope and pray is the case here.

[wastoute]

“The King” doesn’t have to do anything. Every judge knows this.