Context before the statement... Based on the allegations of the First Amended Complaint, the Court holds that Plaintiffs state law claims are exactly of the kind which turn on substantial questions of federal law. As one of the elements of their claims for fraud and negligent misrepresentation, Plaintiffs must show that Defendants somehow misrepresented a material fact.14 It is undisputed that the material fact at issue in this case is whether under the circumstances of President Obamas birth, the President is a natural born citizen, a term set out in the United States Constitution and construed under federal law. It is true that viewed from one perspective, Plaintiffs suit is about state elections and the manner in which a state political party selects its nominee for federal office and then takes steps to have the nominees name appear on the state-wide ballot for a general election. When cast in this light, it could be argued that Plaintiffs claims are peculiarly a matter of state law. Nevertheless, the primary basis for Plaintiffs state-law claims is the allegation that President Obama is not a natural born citizen of the United States of America, as the Supreme Court has defined the term, and therefore not qualified to serve as President of the United States. Plaintiffs concede as much and actually allege in their First Amended Complaint that President Obama cannot be considered a natural born citizen based on a definition of natural born citizen the United States Supreme Court announced over one hundred and thirty-five years ago in Minor v. Happersett. Plaintiffs ultimate success in proving Defendants liable for fraud or negligent misrepresentation turns then on Plaintiffs ability to prove that President Obama is not a natural born citizen, as federal law defines that concept.15 Therefore, the Court concludes that Plaintiffs claims necessarily raise a stated federal issue.
Furthermore, it is clear that the stated federal issue of President Obamas qualifications for the office are actually disputed and substantial. There is a sharp dispute in this case over Plaintiffs main contention that President Obama is not a natural born citizen and is otherwise disqualified from the office under the United States Constitution. It is also clear that there will be a legal dispute over the Constitutions definition of natural born citizen and the Supreme Courts decision in Minor. The federal issue presented is obviously contested in this case.
IMO things just heated up!
posted on 04/27/2012 7:45:07 AM PDT
(Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
"IMO things just heated up!"
I think you could very well be right. I too, found it interesting that the judge blew right past Ankeney and WKA and went straight to Minor.
posted on 04/27/2012 7:05:15 PM PDT
(If not you, who? If not now, when?)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson