Obama was issued a copy of his Certificate of Naturalization in 1983. It is not classified nor is it a national security interest. Obama may show the document to anyone he chooses and he may choose not to show it to anyone.
Anyone who has seen the document with Obama’s permission has not violated a law or posed a threat to national security. The Department of Homeland Security is the custodian of all U.S. immigration records. Employees of DHS who have seen the document are prohibited by law of disclosing the contents of records held by DHS due to the Privacy Act.
An eyewitness to Obama’s Certificate of Naturalization is only relevant to the Court in a civil procedure if a complaint gets to the discovery phase and the custodian of the record deny its existence or claim it cannot be found. The eyewitness is called as a rebuttal witness to testify they have examined the document or a certified copy with the permission of the subject.
Unfortunately, cases concerning Obama’s Certificate of Naturalization do not get to discovery. Some people believe an affidavit or an uncertified copy of the document will get the case to discovery. That’s not true. Allegations in a complaint for a civil matter are considered to be true. For example, the plaintiff alleges the defendant is ineligible to be POTUS. The Court proceeds with the understanding the defendant is ineligible for POTUS without examining any affidavits or uncertified copies. Even though the Court proceeds with the understanding the defendant is ineligible, the case is dismissed for various reasons.
Consequently, the focus should be on getting a case to discovery and not obtaining rogue copies from disgruntled employees. This is what Obama’s defenders are focusing on. As long as a case doesn’t make it to discovery, then he is safe. If a case makes it to discovery, then Obama’s only choice will be to resign or ignore the subpoena.
Sven in your #102 you say
“...... Employees of DHS who have seen the document are prohibited by law of disclosing the contents of records held by DHS due to the Privacy Act. ......”
You said awhile back that you saw 0’s immigration docs (it was either a CLN or a naturalization).
You have a blog stating this, and you have said it here on FR.
Are you not in violation of the privacy act law?
The only way you are not in violation is if o gave you permission.
When did he do this?