High Court takes Pass on Obama REsidency Suit

Daily Herald ^ | AP

[Froggie]

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court has turned down an emergency appeal from a New Jersey man who says President-elect Barack Obama is ineligible to be president because he was a British subject at birth.

The court did not comment on its order Monday rejecting the call by Leo Donofrio of East Brunswick, New Jersey, to intervene in the presidential election. Donofrio says that since Obama had dual nationality at birth -- his mother was American and his Kenyan father at the time was a British subject -- he cannot possibly be a "natural born citizen," one of the requirements the Constitution lists for eligibility to be president.

Donofrio also contends that two other candidates, Republican John McCain and Socialist Workers candidate Roger Calero, also are not natural-born citizens and thus ineligible to be president.

At least one other appeal over Obama's citizenship remains at the court. Philip J. Berg of Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania, argues that Obama was born in Kenya, not Hawaii as Obama says and the Hawaii secretary of state has confirmed.

Berg says Obama also may be a citizen of Indonesia, where he lived as a boy. Federal courts in Pennsylvania have dismissed Berg's lawsuit.

[Froggie]

GUTLESS !

[snowsislander]

This is a surprisingly accurate story from the AP.

[Yo-Yo]

Residency Suit? Maybe P residency Suit?

[SueRae]

Isn’t it odd that all these “news” agencies can report with lightening speed on the SC rejection...but you hardly heard from them when the case was filed..... i am not surprised

[gunnyg]

stand fast—this may well eventually prove to be our Alamo!

Semper Fidelis
Dick G
~~~~~

[Star Traveler]

You said — “GUTLESS !”

Yep..., it’s like I’ve posted before about the Supreme Court, concerning Obama being a “natural-born Kenyan” and not being qualified as President of the United States. The Supreme Court is not interested in resolving this issue — but — they may resolve it after Obama has served his term in office... LOL..

So much for the Constitution...

[babygene]

“not Hawaii as Obama says and the Hawaii secretary of state has confirmed.”

I didn’t think that the Hawaii secretary of state confirmed that...

[gunnyg]

“Isn’t it odd that all these “news” agencies can report with lightening speed on the SC rejection...but you hardly heard from them when the case was filed..... i am not surprised”
**************
Yep, and predictable—the talking heads are as gleeful as pigs in slop!

[Star Traveler]

You said — “Isn’t it odd that all these “news” agencies can report with lightening speed on the SC rejection...but you hardly heard from them when the case was filed..... i am not surprised”

It puts a lot of readers in an odd position of hearing about the “end of the story” (so to speak) — before they ever heard about the beginning of the story... LOL...

[snowsislander]

I didn’t think that the Hawaii secretary of state confirmed that...

You are correct: the Hawaii secretary of state has not made such a confirmation. The head of the health department (Ms. Fukino) made a very cautious statement about Hawaii having some records relating to Mr. Obama's birth, but did not clarify anything about those records the State of Hawaii had on file.

[Sibre Fan]

The AP story is ALMOST “accurate” - the story says that Pennsylvania court*s* have dismissed Berg’s case.

Not true. It *is* true that the Third Circuit denied Berg’s first emergency application. However, (a) his appeal is still alive; and (b) his new emergency motion has not yet been ruled on. (Appellees’ briefs are due Dec. 19, I believe).

In other words, only the PA federal district court has dismissed his case.

******IMPORTANT******
Even if SCOTUS denies Berg’s pending writ, remember - he still has an appeal pending in the Third Circuit.

And, if the Third Circuit upholds the District Court’s decision, Berg could, conceivably, return to SCOTUS to file another “regular” writ petition related to that order.

[ctdonath2]

Reminder: this case is NOT about O’s birth certificate. It is about his alleged* father’s citizenship, and the consequences thereof.

* - “alleged” because the case does not address the official original birth certificate, and thus does not address who his actual father is (of which there is some circumstantial doubt). The case may very well have been denied precisely because it could turn out to be chasing a red herring.

[snowsislander]

The AP story is ALMOST “accurate” - the story says that Pennsylvania court*s* have dismissed Berg’s case.

I am always surprised when any AP writer gets to over 70% accuracy in any reasonably detailed article.

[Centurion2000]

Declined without comment? Someone is scared sh*tless about this case.

[Jack Black]

stand fast—this may well eventually prove to be our Alamo! Hmm. You mean we rally around the cause, but are hopelessly outnumbered, fight on, and are all killed to the last man. But eventually the place we fought becomes a major tourist attraction and bad movies are made about our heroic stand? With my luck Jack Black would play Jack Black.

[helpfulresearcher]

Perhaps the Berg case is the stronger of the two. Furthermore it was filed by a Democrat which seems more fair and objective. Plus Berg seems more capable as a lawyer to make the case both in the press and the court.

Just maybe they passed on this one so they could hear the stronger of the two cases.

[nathanbedford]

The decision of the Supreme Court declining to grant certiorari was certainly not unexpected. It is unknowable whether another case was different fact patterns might draw the court' s interest.

Meanwhile, the matter returns to the political arena. I think that the Internet alone is probably an inadequate sounding board to gain much traction with this issue. It is a pity that the big guns in talk radio have declined to take this matter up. I think it is a legitimate issue. Why should we be called kooks when it is Obama who is being thoroughly irresponsible? For a $10 piece of paper he could forestall millions of dollars worth of lawsuits and bind the country together rather than preside over its fratricide. Is it not legitimate to ask who is responsible and who is irresponsible under these circumstances? But in the long run, Obama is courting a real crisis in legitimacy and confidence.

Mr. President-elect, there is a cancer on the presidency.

[Star Traveler]

You said — “Declined without comment? Someone is scared sh*tless about this case.”

They don’t comment...

You’re making something out of nothing.

[FrankR]

"You said — “Isn’t it odd that all these “news” agencies can report with lightening speed on the SC rejection...but you hardly heard from them when the case was filed..... i am not surprised” "

Oh, you can believe the press has been watching this like a hawk...each afraid to be the first one to speak up for fear of embarassment and losing their standing invitation to the White House partys.

But, if it ever comes to pass that obama's not eligible for the Presidency, the MSM will come out of the woodwork fanatically declaring that they "knew it all along". They will be tripping all over one another trying to get the "scoop"...a meaningless term in this day and age of instant electronic communication. No one cares who breaks the story "first", we only care who gets it "right".

[Dustbunny]

I knew they would. We are now stuck with a POTUS who just may not be a natural born citizen.

Why would any of us think the Supreme Court would follow the Constitution?

[Jack Black]

You are correct: the Hawaii secretary of state has not made such a confirmation. The head of the health department (Ms. Fukino) made a very cautious statement about Hawaii having some records relating to Mr. Obama's birth, but did not clarify anything about those records the State of Hawaii had on file.

Ms. Fukino needs to be deposed in a civil suit and asked many detailed questions about what she saw, her motivations, who she voted for, etc.

[gunnyg]

“You mean we rally around the cause, but are hopelessly outnumbered, fight on, and are all killed to the last man....”
*************
I mean this could be the point from which things could start back to bite them in the @$$!
Who knows, there may be more out there than we suspect with operating brains and grit in their hearts—the fat broad ain’t sung yet....

[Tallguy]

So the strongest (IMO) suit against Obama has been dismissed. I guess we know where this is going.

[Ann Archy]

America is BROKEN.....BROKEN....EVERYTHING and EVERYBODY in POWER ARE BROKEN......CORRUPT....GUTLESS.....WEAK.

[Jack Black]

Donofrio’s lawsuit was always very questionable, in my opinion. It focused on the fact that in Donofrio’s opinion because Obama’s dad was a Kenyan Obama was not eligible for the POTUS. The problem is that there isn’t anything that really supports this claim, except perhaps some books from the 1700s that explain the natural law basis of citizenship as based on the father.

I am not in the least bit surprised they rejected it, as I argued they would and should last week.

It is the Berg lawsuit that is far more interesting. It raises the issue most of us are most interested in: why can’t we see the birth certificate?

You might have been able to get there on the Donofrio suit, but you would have probably given creedence to his wacky “three types of citizens” claim. (Citizen via Birth, Naturalized Citizen, and Natural Born Citizen using his “dad’s the key” argument.)

Seeing as this concept has never existed in our law it was unlikely that the SCOTUS was going to introduce it at this late date.

Now the idea that you have to check qualifications for office has a long pedigree in American law, and is understandable to most citizens. (And logical. And correct.)

[Kleon]

I knew they would. We are now stuck with a POTUS who just may not be a natural born citizen. Why would any of us think the Supreme Court would follow the Constitution?

This has always been about defining something that's never been clearly explained, and defining it in a way that best suits our purpose. If it was clear from the constitution that Obama couldn't be President, then either Clinton or McCain would have jumped on it.

[Tallguy]

Perhaps the Berg case is the stronger of the two. Furthermore it was filed by a Democrat which seems more fair and objective.

With all due respect, why should the political affiliation of the plaintiff matter one bit? Aren't legal cases supposed to be decided on the facts? I guess I'm just naive.

[tflabo]

Why should this decision surprise us? Government at all levels has been a HUGE failure and when the highest court in the land won’t even inspect the simple appeal to authenticate if the President-elect has a valid citizenship
required for office then we have no faith in government.
We’ve now become a nation more like the tyrannical British rulers that the founders revolted against.

[Las Vegas Ron]

A slap in the face to American’s and an invitation to kaos....yeb, right on track with the plan

[ROLF of the HILL COUNTRY]

“So the strongest (IMO) suit against Obama has been dismissed.”

You're wrong. The strongest suit by far is the one by Alan Keyes. He was a presidential candidate; has standing to bring such a suit, and has addressed the ramifications of ineligible person holding the office therein.

If HIS suit is dismissed, and we don't all take to the streets, then we're just a bunch of “fair weather patriots”!

[blaquebyrd]

"Plus Berg seems more capable as a lawyer to make the case both in the press and the court."

Capable? Berg is a loon. He's a 911 truther who sued Bush and Cheney for conspiring to committ the 911 attacks. He also sued Bush claiming Bush v Gore was wrongly decided. Guess what this "capable" lawyer lost both cases and a third he filed against the Bush admin for covering up details of the 911 attacks. It's mind-boggling that FReepers would now back this fruit bat. After his 911 suits he should have been disbarred. Obama couldn't have picked a better loser than Berg to bring suit against him.

[The_Reader_David]

Not really. I personally never thought Donofrio’s brief was worth the paper it was printed on. Berg’s suit was always the stronger. Donofrio’s was based on a legal theory with no supporting statutory or case law, to wit, that a person who could claim dual citizenship at birth is not a ‘natural born citzen’. Berg’s is based on a demand that Obama prove he was a citizen at birth, i.e. that he satisfied the prima facia meaning of ‘natural born citizen’, and thus involves nothing other than an issue of fact, and Obama’s refusal to establish a factual basis for his Constitutional eligibility.

I wish a serving member of the armed forces were a plaintiff or a coplaintiff on either Berg’s suit or another based on the same legal theory. It would be harder to claim lack of standing if a plaintiff had sworn an oath to defend the Constitution, and was facing the possibility of having a Constitutionally inelibible purported Commander-in-Chief.

[Snapping Turtle]

The big guns in radio now have a story to tell, since it’s finally been let loose by the MSM. Now, they can do their own research and some interviews! Anyone out there got the guts?

[Major Matt Mason]

Perhaps the Berg case is the stronger of the two. Furthermore it was filed by a Democrat which seems more fair and objective. Plus Berg seems more capable as a lawyer to make the case both in the press and the court.

Don't hold your breath. Those inside D.C. protect their own, regardless of ideology. The SC is not about to upset the apple cart, regardless of the merits of this case.

[The_Reader_David]

You won’t have evidence of that unless they do the same with Berg’s suit. Donofrio’s was based on a legal theory he cut out of whole cloth, and probably should have been declined without comment. Berg’s on the other hand, depends on no novel legal reasoning.

[Sig Sauer P220]

Those MF’ers.

[IrishPennant]

stand fast—this may well eventually prove to be our Alamo!

Well said Gunny!

[Lesforlife]

Prayers for Dr. Keyes pursuit of justice!

[Las Vegas Ron]

Obama couldn't have picked a better loser than Berg to bring suit against him

hmmmmm

[gunnyg]

irish pennant....where have I heard that before?

Thank you for your response—much appreciated.

Dick Gaines
GnySgt USMC (Ret.)
1952-’72
~~~~~

[353FMG]

By now it should be apparent to all that the question of Obama’s qualifications for POTUS merits an official investigation by Congress and that, so far, the SCOTUS has denied justice in this case. Is this perhaps the beginning of the intentional destruction of the US Constitution?

[razorback-bert]

We have become a banana republic.

In modern usage the term has come to be used to describe a generally unstable or "backward" dictatorial regime, especially one where elections are often fraudulent and corruption is rife. By extension, the word is occasionally applied to governments where a strong leader hands out appointments and advantages to friends and supporters, without much consideration for the law.

[blaquebyrd]

Yep, here's a direct quote from Berg regarding his 911 suit against Bush and Cheney,

“It is time for the nations of the world to come forth and take the leadership because of the failure of the United States Government and the States where crimes were committed on 09/11/01, where no thorough investigation and indictments occurred, to investigate, arrest and prosecute the people responsible for the murders on 9/11/01, specifically including George W. Bush and Richard Cheney.

” “Bush and his cronies made 9/11 happen or let it happen. And, if they let it happen, then they made it happen. Either way, they are responsible; and more important, they have completely and unequivocally covered-it-up!”

Yes, this is from the guy FReepers are putting their faith in. Unbelievable.

[Tallguy]

You're wrong. The strongest suit by far is the one by Alan Keyes.

I would be happy to be proven wrong.

[AmericanVictory]

Except for the “confirmed” part.

[Tax Government]

What they’re saying is, it’s congress’ problem.

[Las Vegas Ron]

Ya know it's kind of funny, I was going to make a flippant remark about me removing the tin foil hat when I posted that, then considering the turn of events here in the last 60-90 days, thought at this point, anything is possible.

I guess to defeat evil, you have to think like evil people and there is no doubt in my mind that the 1 is evil, along with his comrades.

Nothing would really surprise me anymore, to be honest.

[Las Vegas Ron]

What they’re saying is, it’s congress’ problem.

I sure wish they would have said so - would have been a brilliant move on their part.

[ga medic]

“Why would any of us think the Supreme Court would follow the Constitution?”

Seriously, there are 4 strong conservative justices at the Supreme Court. The case was presented and Justice Thomas allowed it to be brought to conference. If Scalia, Thomas, Roberts and Alito did not feel this case had merit, then it didn’t have merit.

This case was attempting to create a definition of natural born status, which was not clarified in the Constitution. Not only that, Donofrio was using a pretty obscure interpretation of natural born, which had never been used before. The SCOTUS obviously decided that his interpretation did not have merit. This is far different from failing to follow the constitution.

[blaquebyrd]

"I guess to defeat evil, you have to think like evil people and there is no doubt in my mind that the 1 is evil, along with his comrades."

I got you, but there has to come a time when you ask why aren't distinguished conservative lawyers like Gonzalez, Ted Olsen, Ashcroft, any from Reagan admin, or from Bush defense team during Bush v Gore touching this? Seems only the loons, losers, and 911 truthers are stepping forward to challenge this. Having 911 truthers like Berg and Corsi lead the charge only benefits Obama.