Skip to comments.Has 'standing' been created in hunt for Obama birth doc?Judges threaten penalties for seeking info
Posted on 07/09/2010 10:31:02 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
A decision by Judges Dolores Sloviter, Maryanne Trump Barry and Thomas Hardiman of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals may have opened the door to questions on the record about President Obama's birth documentation and eligibility to be president, according to an attorney in the case.
The judges' opinion recently dismissed as "frivolous" an appeal of a lower-court decision throwing out questions about whether the British Nationality Act of 1948 made Obama, at his birth to an American mother and Kenyan father, a subject of the British crown, thus possibly making him ineligible under the Constitution's requirement that a president be a "natural born citizen."
The case filed was against Obama, Congress and others, just before Obama was sworn into office, arguing that Obama was a British subject and not a U.S. citizen.
"We further contend that Obama has failed to even conclusively prove that he is at least a 'citizen of the United States' under the Fourteenth Amendment as he claims by conclusively proving that he was born in Hawaii," the lawsuit claimed.
Named as defendants are Barack Hussein Obama II, the U.S., Congress, the Senate, the House of Representatives, former Vice President Dick Cheney and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
The case alleges Congress failed to follow the Constitution, which "provides that Congress must fully qualify the candidate 'elected' by the Electoral College Electors."
A lower court dismissed the action, claiming the plaintiffs lack "standing" to make a claim about an alleged violation of the Constitution meaning they weren't personally "injured" by the act.
The 3rd Circuit agreed.
"It is axiomatic that standing to sue is a prerequisite to Article III jurisdiction," the opinion said. "This constitutional mandate requires that appellants show, inter alia, an 'injury in fact.'"
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Every citizen is impacted by the president... Just check obamacare
And to claim that every case brought ‘has no standing’ is just another example of the lawlessness we are living under
When do we start to disregard those in power? It’s not like they are following the Constitution or anything
When do we start to disregard those in power?
I am sure it is already underway.
Have you seen this?
What Good Can a Handgun Do Against An Army?
Why obamma insists on dragging this out, when if he American-born and can prove, is beyond me? I suspect obamma cannot prove it, and in fact may not be American-born.
Will HE explain this to us?
There has been no court trial where such evidence would be heard, because nobody has had a valid case.
It's the lawyers filing these pointless suits that are dragging it out. This is not a matter for courts. They aren't going to get what they want.
In this case, “standing” seems to be more of an excuse than a true issue. It’s obvious that every citizen, individually and collectively, is injured by fraud if fraud has indeed been committed. If there’s a judge that comprehends this basic principle, he or she certainly isn’t getting to hear any of these cases.
Well he is a Sten....
curiosity is in the shower looking for “what” fell off....
Try to convince me that the folks with children to take care of that live in the Gulf have no standing....they have been robbed of their livelihood...just as we ALL will be, soon. And, BP is NOT handing out money for their loss. They are being held hostage, because Obama HATES white people and people that didn’t support him...just like Oklahoma and Tenessee, that will not receive federal aid after their damaging storms! Yeah...no “standing”.
Obama played golf, while the gulf population was being decimated....people with children AND wildlife.
He’s really so thoroughly pathetic that I almost feel sorry for him...I hope he enjoys his parties and cocaine and trips because he’ll spend eternity paying for it.
It's not an excuse. If you read the decisions you'd find that the judges specifically explain an injury to "everyone" does not qualify. There must be a specific harm, it must not be hypothetical, and also there must be something the court has the power to do about it. For one or all of these reasons, all the suits have been and will continue to be rejected.
“There has been no court trial where such evidence would be heard, because nobody has had a valid case.”
Nonsense. Our representative republic is a form of *self* government, and that self is us.
If we want proof that the Kenyan Commie is eligible to be president, then no court in the land, no bureaucrat, no elected official, has any authority to deny us.
That’s why it’s called *self* government.
Besides, the fact that an elected official would spend that much money to conceal the records of his birth is so suspicious as to create a prima facie criminal case.
That articles of impeachment have not been filed only goes to show that congressional republicans don’t have even a single testicle to share among the lot of them.
So at least as long as the court believes it lacks the “power” to unseat Obama, this rope a dope will continue.
I have to respectfully disagree, although I understand what you are saying; the specific harm is fraud upon the People and upon the Rule of Law. Standing cannot be negated simply because everyone is harmed. This particular requirement in the Constitution, when not met, produces even more fraud with every bill signed and every order given to the military.
Obviously, I am not a lawyer. When common sense cannot be applied in a court of law, what’s the point of a court of law? Where’s a Founding Father/lawyer when you need him?
This means that the 3rd ckt judges haven't kept up with the events of the past 18 months.
Tantamount to stepping over someone on the ground all cut up and bleeding and telling the person to shut up and stop complaining...
I just wonder if alive today, would Orwell laugh or cry?
I had predicted that by this past Spring, it would be the Democrats (again) demanding Obama’s birth certificate. Things have moved fast, but not that fast. I revive my prediction and say that will here the first noises about Obama’s eligibility to be President right after the November election. As Winter hits and continues, we’ll start to hear more Democrats, including elected Democrats. By next Spring, it’ll be public and ‘birther’ won’t be an insult anymore.
Why are these “frivolous” questions???
I really really don’t understand.
If he could answer them, he would or could do so in a heart beat.
These questions seem to me to be vitally important to every citizen of the Republic.
But, it seems, that’s just me ...
If he is American born, I’ll bet his name was never Barack Hussein Obama until he assumed that identity in his early college days. It could be that his father is not who he says. That would be a reason to conceal the truth. He is one big fraud, either way.
I wonder what evidence supports the judges' opinion that the case is "frivolous?" Did they simple declare or "deem" that it is frivolous? What evidence do they have to support their assertions? Who do they want to please and why? From what I read there is no hard evidence to support such a finding; the judges are using frivolous evidence to justify their action, IMO.
Why not go for a search warrant to get access to the original documents? Seems to me there is probable cause to believe a crime has and is being committed.
I suspect that you are correct. The larger question,however, is why our court system is covering for this man and completely ignoring our constitution. How can a citizen not have “standing” when any act of the president impacts them?
Doesn't matter where the Obama was born. He is not a 'natural born citizen' as his father was a foreign national.
Why? Why? Why? does THIS point keep getting ignored?? I don’t give a darn WHERE he was born. It is a distraction. Is there a debate about his father? I thought ALL agreed he was a British citizen. Why does that simple fact not make him a fraud as President?? Where he was born just clouds up the issue.
Most assuredly...curiouser, indeed. The whole question of ‘standing’ has been troublesome since the first case was filed. IMO, this is another example of a disconnect between what is right and what is legal. Common sense Americans know, innately, that any candidate in opposition should have ‘standing’. They know that ANY citizen who voted in the election for anyone other than the anointed one should have ‘standing’.
The legalistic arguments of particularized injury, etc., ring hollow to many of us.
That being said, however, we should respect the court’s decision and move forward within the framework of our system of jurisprudence. Take appeals where possible, challenge where necessary, and engage all appropriate resources to ferret out the truth.
It IS that important.
Would a person having their private health care canceled,tossed into Obama care and have a demonstrable injury inflicted upon them due to lesser coverage qualify?
If yes there should be millions of qualified claimants in a few years.
Everything about him is wrong.
That is just it. He doesn’t have to prove anything in the courts. Under our system, if he has or is suspected of a crime, he is innocent until proven guilty.
So, we need the evidence. 0bama, in a court setting has no obligation to produce any self-incriminating evidence.
If he is guilty of pulling off the greatest fraud in history...we need figure out a way to get the solid evidence.
If he is a British subject, then we’ve been looking in the wrong places for the evidence.
1. His skin is black.
2. His wife is black, and a direct descendant of slaves.
3. His children are descendants of slaves.
3 The One trillion he borrowed and pissed away is reparations for slavery.
4. 20 million descendants of slavery don't give a damn that the constitution forbids him from being president. Like an NBA championship game, they will riot the day he leaves office, regardless of reason, burning and looting our cities.
“This is not a matter for courts.”
It’s not? Can you explain that in more detail?
It appears to me that the whole American system is covering for this imposter. That includes the Democratic and Republican parties, Congress, Cheney, Pelosi, the courts, Main Street media. Fox News, BOR, Beck et al.
The cover up is more significant than the actual crime, as serious as that could be.
Why is it so important for this unqualified incompetent Communist to be President and for the power structure to cover up and ignore the truth? Why the abomination called health care reform?
>>There has been no court trial where such evidence would be heard, because nobody has had a valid case.<<
You say this as if you are in fact an attorney. Never in my 60+ years have I seen any single issue destroy the faith in America’s political and judicial system as rapidly as this one is doing. Talk about a trust crushing tactic, this is the one that will succeed. If loss of trust in ones government isn’t a serious injury then nothing is.
It seems, that the basic documents to be qualified to become President have been ignored. The basic documents and their examination and certifications as authentic have been circumvented. This is dereliction of duty of the highest order. However, because the proper steps where not taken, or ignored, it seems those in power have a vested interest in maintaining this charade. To undo it now, would demonstrate their incompetence and throw our Country into chaos. Pretty sad.
The whole bunch in Washington needs to be thrown out and we need a constitutional amendment, providing for term limits on Congress and to stop life time service on the Supreme Court. If a major change in Congress does not take place in November our Country, as we know it, is gone!
“When common sense cannot be applied in a court of law, whats the point of a court of law?”
Thank you for this great statement.
"...because nobody has had a valid case."
"You say this as if you are in fact an attorney."
I'm not, but all these cases have been repeatedly analyzed and fail for some very basic reasons. There have been plenty of actual attorneys here that will tell you the same, unanimously as far as I know.
Not only is standing a problem, but most of these cases just present the court with a set of suspicions and ask the court to investigate. That's not what courts do.
They also fail to present a controversy over which the court has any power to resolve. The US Constitution specifically gives the Electors and the Congress the power to decide the presidency. They've done that. It's over. No court in the country has the power to revisit that decision. The only recourse is impeachment.
"Never in my 60+ years have I seen any single issue destroy the faith in Americas political and judicial system as rapidly as this one is doing. Talk about a trust crushing tactic, this is the one that will succeed. If loss of trust in ones government isnt a serious injury then nothing is."
The question about Obama's eligibility is not affecting most people that strongly. But for those it does, it's a consequence of their own state of mind, not someone else's choices. If you don't believe there is a legitimate birther issue in the first place then there's no reason to allow it to affect you. There is no legitimate issue. Birth in Hawaii makes him eligible.
You can't claim you've been injured if you don't first prove that something illegal happened.
As I read it, Congress did not decide that Obama did not qualify and thereby cause an issue. That is what Section 3 of the 20 Amendment speaks to.
Then why doesn't McCain or Palin sue?
The Demonrats would if the roles were reversed.
“If not, obamma needs to resign”
He needs to be put on trial for sedition!
The fact that the courts refuse to address this issue is evidence in my mind of the depth of corruption in our judiciary. We are a lawless nation. Eventually that leads either to anarchy or revolution. Frankly we are getting to the point where either of those alternatives would be better than the status quo.
I believe this is what's behind Obama's sending lawyers to fight release.
Obama is a professional poseur, and it served him well, in early years, to hype a muslim connection.
However, the Congress covering for the president gives the courts the justification to say that no one has done anything illegal that injures anyone.
The point is that we don’t yet have proof of Obama’s illegal status.
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.