Replies

From your link ...

"Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982),[1] was a Supreme Court of the United States court case that dealt with immunity from suit to government officials performing discretionary functions when their action did not violate clearly established law."

It's difficult to sustain a civil suit against any defendant where it has not been alleged a law was broken and an injury was sustained by the plaintiff due to the negligence of the defendant.

Some have argued, in the press and on the net, Obama is violating the ADA (established law) by his discretionary actions; such as, exempting certain groups from the compliance of the law by executive order. Unless, of course, Obama is exempting those who have challenged his eligibility to be President by not meeting the Constitutional requirements to hold the office. Consequently, he is settling their complaint with an exemption from the law before a complaint is filed with the U.S. District Court.

The Founding Fathers never intended ballot eligibility to equate to eligibility for the office of POTUS. The People, through their selection of Electors, can vote for anyone they choose to be their President. If the People choose an ineligible President, then it is up to the minority to object on an individual basis in Federal Court to being subjected to the laws, regulations and appointments of the usurper. An individual can only obtain standing when they can show a direct and particularized harm due to the actions of the usurper.

An ineligible President may settle a complaint without going to trial and without proving he's eligible for the office by exempting those who complain about the laws and regulations he has signed. After Obama leaves office, all laws, regulations and appointments become valid by the De Facto Officer Doctrine. Consequently, Obama is merely running out the clock on his laws, regulations and appointments until he leaves office.

As of this time, there has been no judicial ruling of a violation of law. “Suggestions” of law violations aren’t enough, there would need to be a definitive ruling.
If there was to be a court ruling or a congressional finding of ineligibility, then all bets would be off, but there has been no such judicial or congressional finding.