Posted on 01/22/2009 1:22:47 PM PST by dascallie
"Activism, Eligibility, Kerchner v. Obama, POTUS » Kerchner v. Obama: Complaint, Petition Filed in NJ Federal District Court Thu, Jan 22, 2009
Mario Apuzzo, a New Jersey attorney, filed a case early Tuesday morning, a Complaint for Emergency Injunction, Declaratory Relief, Mandamus, and Petition for Quo Warranto:
On early Tuesday morning, January 20, 2009, at about 3:00 a.m., I filed a Complaint for Emergency Injunction, Declaratory Relief, Mandamus, and Petition for Quo Warranto on behalf of my clients, Mr. Kerchner, Mr. Patterson, Mr. LeNormand, and Mr. Nelsen, against defendants, Barack Hussein Obama II, United States of America, United States Congress, United States Senate, United States House of Representatives, Richard B. Cheney, and Nancy Pelosi. I filed the complaint in the Federal District Court of New Jersey and is now pending in Camden. It bears Civil Action No. 1:09-cv-00253. The complaint seeks to learn the truth about whether Obama is an Article II “natural born Citizen” and eligible to be President and Commander in Chief. On January 21, 2009, I filed an Amended Complaint for Emergency Injunction, Declaratory Relief, Mandamus, and Petition for Quo Warranto. The Complaint and the Amended Complaint can be accessed and viewed at the District Court of New Jersey and Pacer web site. I will also be uploading a copy of the documents at this blog site as soon as possible so that they may be more easily viewed.
The defendants have not yet been served. I am now in the process of requesting that the Court issue to me the summonses so that I can then serve as soon as possible the Summons and Amended Complaint on the defendants.
As you know, the courts have refused to reach the underlying merits of the many lawsuits that have been filed on the question of whether Mr. Obama is an Article II “natural born Citizen” and eligible to be President and Commander in Chief. My clients and I hope that we will get a court to reach the underlying merits of this question so that the American people will be assured that Mr. Obama is their legitimate President and not an usurper. I will appreciate whatever comments anyone has on the merits of this lawsuit.
Mario Apuzzo, Esq."
How about a class action suit on behalf of contributors? He took so much phony money he couldn't possibly prove any particular person didn't contribute. If he were to make a claim than any individual did not have standing, wouldn't discovery allow an interesting look at his campaign financials?
Sir:
Where ever Obama was born, he was a British Citizen at the time of his borth vy virtue of his father being a British Citizen.
As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject
whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act
of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.’s children:
“British Nationality Act of 1948 (Part II, Section 5): Subject to the
provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of
this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by
descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies
at the time of the birth.” In other words, at the time of his birth,
Barack Obama Jr. was both a U.S. citizen (by virtue of being born in
Hawaii) and a citizen of the United Kingdom by virtue of being born to
a father who was a citizen of the UK. Obama’s UK citizenship became an
Kenyan citizenship on Dec. 12, 1963, when Kenya formally gained its
independence from the United Kingdom. The court noted that Chapter VI,
Section 87 of the Kenyan Constitution specifies that:
In other words, the courts have used every dodge and excuse they could find, plus some we may not know about, to avoid their responsibility.
Won't go anywhere. It'll be like the countless lawsuits brought during the Vietnam war declaring Johnson/Nixon had no right to keep troops in combat without a declaration of war.
Obama is President. The only thing that can remove him is Impeachment in the House and conviction in the Senate. The Judicial branch of government has no authority to remove him or to to declare him "unqualified for office" resulting in his executive orders or signed legislation unconstitutional. These suits are now just a waste of time. It makes me more than a little ill.
Rocky: "But that trick never works."
Bullwinkle: "This time for sure!"
You're wrong. Berg did, and his was the first. I think just about all the rest have as well.
Nothing he did would be constitutional.
Is it a true statement that should Obummer be found to be ineligible to hold the office of the President that everything he did while in office would immediately become null and void?
I gotta remember that. I’m still living in the past (pre-Obummer).
“Now, someone who is affected by an official act of Zobama has to file suit to have it declared void because he is not qualified to be President.”
Seems to me that could be ANY taxpayer if he signs off on a trillion+ dollar ‘stimulus’ bill...
Or, any heterosexual member of the US Military, once gays are OK’d by the 0bama administration...
Frankly, if it all comes to nothing, and it well may, the more trouble decent people can cause 'him' the better. If he is busy trying to defend himself, he isn't busy damaging America.
No, the difference re those suits is that there would be standing. A specific harm to specific persons.
The difficulty (IMO) would be presenting sufficient evidence to get to the discovery phase. It would be ‘proving a negative’.
Who gives a damn where Obama was born! WHAT???
We are going about this the wrong way. It is very easy to prove that Obama was a British Citizen at birth.
The answer is right here:
Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.’s children:
“British Nationality Act of 1948 (Part II, Section 5): Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth.” In other words, at the time of his birth,
Barack Obama Jr. was both a U.S. citizen (by virtue of being born in Hawaii) and a citizen of the United Kingdom by virtue of being born to a father who was a citizen of the UK.
But how can it stand if he signed it into law illegally?
I could be wrong and am certainly NOT claiming infallibility on this incredibly complicated issue, but...I believe many of those Vietnam era suits were filed by individuals trying to escape service; an individual suit for an individual circumstance. And yet, those too weren't even heard for "lack of standing". That's the courts catch-all phrase for not wanting to get involved. I presume we will be hearing much more of it the next several years.
Charlie Brown: This time Lucy is going to hold the football and I am going to kick it through the goal posts.
Charlie Brown: This time Lucy is going to hold the football and I am going to kick it through the goal posts.
Yeah... it was considered a “political question”.
The difference here is that this is a matter of law and not political. The courts say what the law means since Marbury.
I don’t know what’ll happen either. This is just too unique.
Frankly I hope Zobama is qualified.
You do???
I hope with every fiber of my being that he is proven to be a lying fraudulent non-citizen or at least non-natural born citizen and is tossed off the stage.
How do you subpoena the president. I mean the Secret Service wouldn’t let you get that close.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.