In order to create a court case where the evidence itself can be examined, the judge was REQUIRED to presume that the charge in the affidavit was true. On appeal, Obama could try to refute the charge.
Here’s a court case cited by the Congressional Research SErvice’s 2011 version of a memo on Presidential eligibility. This regards a man born in 1909 (before hospital births were routine and before birth certificate registration was nearly automatic). Sometimes this guy claimed he was born in the US and sometimes he claimed he was born in Greece. There was no legally valid BC either place. So the court had to filter through all the evidence to see what was credible and what wasn’t. He did have a delayed birth certificate from the US, which in the absence of any other BC anywhere else and the spottiness of birth certificate registration in that area at the time was considered a legal starting point. Because the OTHER evidence, including official records in Greece, supported what was on that delayed birth certificate it was ruled that he was born in the US and his claims otherwise were to get out of registering for the draft and his friend making misinformed claims about him on his behalf (on his 2nd marriage certificate) because he was drunk at the time.
This is the case: LIACAKOS v. KENNEDY
195 F.Supp. 630 (1961)
United States District Court District of Columbia.
June 29, 1961.
This is where it is found: http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?page=4&xmldoc=1961825195FSupp630_1716.xml&docbase=CSLWAR1-1950-1985&SizeDisp=7
And this is a money quote that fits what the SOS and/or judge needed to do according to Washington statute: PROVIDE A CASE FOR APPEAL:
“A ruling of an administrative official denying citizenship has no prima facie effect or any other effect except to serve as a basis for establishing a justiciable controversy. What is being tried now is the cause of action for a declaratory judgment to establish citizenship. In such an action the burden of proof is on the plaintiff. This burden of proof, however, need not be sustained beyond a reasonable doubt, but merely by a fair preponderance of the evidence, for naturally, the proceeding is of a civil nature.”
In this case, all Jordan is asking - and the law is requiring - is that a ruling be made that establishes a justiciable controversy so that the burden of proof regarding Obama’s birth facts would fall on Obama - the only one who can authorize release of the GENUINE record and not the forgeries he’s been using - and the true facts could be legally determined so that Washington statute requiring the filer to be qualified could be obeyed.
And THAT is precisely what they all failed to do. Deliberately. That failure, in light of law enforcement’s declaration of probable cause for forgery and fraud regarding the documents the candidate has set forth so far, is gross negligence on the part of EVERY ONE of these people: SOS, AG, judge, and justices. All they had to do was create a case for Obama to use as a platform to legally prove he is qualified to be on the WA ballot. There is no legal threat or problem whatsoever, if Obama has a valid HI BC.
IOW, all these people are OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE, albeit in a civil proceeding rather than a criminal one (at this juncture). They should all be either impeached or censured by the bar.