Posted on 01/26/2012 10:44:59 AM PST by Pfesser
After hearing evidence with neither President Barack Obama nor his lawyers in attendance, a state administrative law judge on Thursday did not issue a ruling as to whether Obama can be allowed on the state ballot in November.
Lawyers for area residents mounting "birther" challenges told Deputy Chief Judge Michael Malihi that Obama should be found in contempt of court for not appearing when under subpoena to do so. But Malihi did not indicate he would recommend that and cut off one lawyer when he criticized Obama for not attending the hearing.
"It shows not just a contempt for this court, but contempt for the judicial branch," lawyer Van Irion told Malihi.
"I'm not interested in commentary on that, counselor," Malihi quickly replied.
Late Wednesday, Obama's lawyer, Michael Jablonski, wrote Secretary of State Brian Kemp, asking him to suspend the hearing. "It is well established that there is no legitimate issue here -- a conclusion validated time and again by courts around the country," Jablonski wrote.
Jablonski also served notice he would boycott the hearing.
In response, Kemp said the hearing to consider the challenges is required by Georgia law. "If you and your client choose to suspend your participation in the [Office of State Administrative Hearings] proceedings, please understand that you do so at your own peril," Kemp wrote.
Thursday's hearing was held before a packed courtroom with almost every seat taken -- except for those at the defendant's table facing the judge.
But this is not a “birther” case. It is not based on the notion that a conspiracy has hidden the location of Obama’s birth.
The basis of this case is the precedent in Minor v. Happersett, which defined “natural born citizen” after the manner of Vattel’s notion of “natives”, thereby also agreeing with points made in the legislative history of the 14th Amendment. The birth certificate offered in pdf form by Obama is just fine. It confirms that his father was a British subject at the time of his birth, so the location of his birth is irrelevant: as defined by the SCOTUS in Minor v. Happersett, Obama is not a natural born citizen of the United States, and thus ineligible to be President.
If the judge rules on that basis, the appeal will have to get a higher court to rule against stare decisis to overturn the precedent of Minor v. Happersett, at which point the question over which “birthers” have exercised themselves would become a live issue.
DNC language does NOT include language stating Obama is Qualified while the RNC document DOES. http://t.co/Qy873ai4
:: Take that spew elsewhere. ::
Really? I know nothing of Kemp and that’s why I asked. I didn’t deserve that.
http://is.gd/9Oj5m3 The Judge pulled the lawyers for the three cases into chambers before it all began and advised them that he would be issuing a default judgment in our favor, since the Defense council failed to show, and wanted to end it there
That is why they are all absolutely determined that there will never be such a ruling.
It's obvious (to me anyhow) that the reason Obama's lawyers "boycotted" the hearing is because if they showed up they would be forced to answer questions that would be devastating to the current illegal regime.
The biggest question that "Must Not Be Asked" in any venue where an answer is unavoidable is "Have you seen any of the documents in question?"
They haven't because those documents do not exist.
Well there is one court they will all attend, when they stand before God. Justice will be true in the end. For now, it seems most of the judicial branch has joined in the sucession from the Constitution that the Executive branch has spawned.
The burden of proof to establish eligibility is on the individual seeking the office.
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.