Skip to comments.Jeff Schreiber on Berg Suit Dismissal
Posted on 10/25/2008 7:58:24 AM PDT by Technical Editor
Saturday, October 25, 2008 Lawsuit Against Obama Dismissed from Philadelphia Federal Court
The order came down at approximately 6:15 p.m. on Friday. Philip Berg's lawsuit challenging Illinois Sen. Barack Obama's constitutional eligibility to serve as president of the United States had been dismissed by the Hon. R. Barclay Surrick on grounds that the Philadelphia attorney and former Deputy Attorney General for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania lacked standing.
Surrick, it seemed, was not satisfied with the nature of evidence provided by Berg to support his allegations.
Various accounts, details and ambiguities from Obamas childhood form the basis of Plaintiffs allegation that Obama is not a natural born citizen of the United States. To support his contention, Plaintiff cites sources as varied as the Rainbow Edition News Letter and the television news tabloid Inside Edition. These sources and others lead Plaintiff to conclude that Obama is either a citizen of his fathers native Kenya, by birth there or through operation of U.S. law; or that Obama became a citizen of Indonesia by relinquishing his prior citizenship (American or Kenyan) when he moved there with his mother in 1967. Either way, in Plaintiffs opinion, Obama does not have the requisite qualifications for the Presidency that the Natural Born Citizen Clause mandates. The Amended Complaint alleges that Obama has actively covered up this information and that the other named Defendants are complicit in Obamas cover-up. A judges attitude toward the factual foundation of a plaintiffs claims is an essential factor in understanding just who indeed has standing to sue. The question running to the heart of the standing doctrine is whether or not the plaintiff indeed has a personal stake in the outcome of the otherwise justiciable matter being adjudicated. As has been discussed before many times here at Americas Right, a plaintiff wishing to have standing to sue must show (1) a particularized injury-in-fact, (2) evidence showing that that the party being sued actually caused the plaintiffs particularized injury-in-fact, and (3) that adjudication of the matter would actually provide redress.
In this case, Judge Surricks attitude toward the evidence presented by Berg to support his allegations figures in heavily because, while there is a three-pronged test to standing in itself, there is no definitive test by which the court can determine whether a certain harm is enough to satisfy the first element of that three-pronged test by showing true injury-in-fact. Traditionally, it hasnt taken much to satisfy the need for an injury-in-fact, but as the plaintiffs claimed injury is perceived as being more remote, more creative, or more speculative, the injury-in-fact requirement becomes more difficult to satisfy.
As it were, much of Bergs basis for injury-in-fact could be considered threatened injuryhe felt that the country was at risk for voter disenfranchisement and that America was certainly headed for a constitutional crisisand, while threatened injury can certainly be injury enough to satisfy the injury-in-fact element, such satisfaction depends upon the threat being perceived by the judge as being not too creative, speculative or remote.
When it came to Philip Bergs personal stake in the matter at hand, Judge Surrick compared his action with those of Fred Hollanderwho sued Sen. John McCain in New Hampshire on grounds that, born in the Panama Canal Zone, he was not a natural born citizenand held that Bergs stake is no greater and his status no more differentiated than that of millions of other voters. The harm cited by Berg, Judge Surrick wrote, is too vague and its effects too attenuated to confer standing on any and all voters.
So, who does have standing? According to the Hon. R. Barclay Surrick, that's completely up to Congress to decide.
If, through the political process, Congress determines that citizens, voters, or party members should police the Constitutions eligibility requirements for the Presidency, then it is free to pass laws conferring standing on individuals like Plaintiff. Until that time, voters do not have standing to bring the sort of challenge that Plaintiff attempts to bring in the Amended Complaint. Judge Surrick not only dismissed Berg's case, but admonished the attorney in several spots in the 34-page memorandum. In one such instance, Judge Surrick noted that Berg had misinterpreted the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in asking the court to permit him to amend his complaint. The first amended complaint was deemed admitted by Judge Surrick on grounds that, under FRCP 15(a), a party can amend once so long as its done before being served with a responsive pleading and that, just as I had not-so-confidently suggested, the motion to dismiss filed on Sept. 24 by Obama and the DNC was not a responsive pleading. Because Berg perceived the motion to dismiss as a responsive pleading and was waiting on the court to grant or deny the motion for leave to amend, he did not serve the additional defendants added in the amended complaint. This, too, was noted by Surrick.
Bergs attempts to distinguish his own case from Hollander were deemed by Judge Surrick to be [h]is most reasonable arguments, but his arguments citing statutory authority were said by the judge to be a venture into the unreasonable and were frivolous and not worthy of discussion. All in all, the judge wrote, it was the satisfaction of the injury-in-fact requirement which was the problem. Bergs harm was simply too intangible.
regardless of questions of causation, the grievance remains too generalized to establish the existence of an injury in fact. To reiterate: a candidates ineligibility under the Natural Born Citizen Clause does not result in an injury in fact to voters. By extension, the theoretical constitutional harm experienced by voters does not change as the candidacy of an allegedly ineligible candidate progresses from the primaries to the general election.
Berg, disappointed by the decision, plans to appeal to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals and then to the United States Supreme Court.
"This is a question of who has standing to stand up for our Constitution," Berg said. "If I don't have standing, if you don't have standing, if your neighbor doesn't have standing to ask whether or not the likely next president of the United States--the most powerful man in the entire world--is eligible to be in that office in the first place, then who does?"
The suits have been filed in state and federal courts in Hawaii, Washington, California, Florida, Georgia, New York, and Connecticut to compel Obama to release his birth records. Ohio was being added yesterday.
The precident has been set that the citizens have no standing.
It doesn’t technically matter WHO Berg is- and it doesn’t change the merits of his case. I’m just biased against anyone who believe the 9-11 truth crap.
But if you read the rest of my post- I am completely convinced Obama is lying about his birth and I agree with you- it’s a very simple matter for him- give the paper copy of his birth certificate to the press and satisfy those of us on the right-wing lunatic fringe ;)
When you were hired in the school system, did you have to show any form of IDs???
Then, since its release to the public four months ago, the image is still claimed to be Obama's "original birth certificate," which it absolutely is not because the original birth certificate looks nothing like the COLB.
There is one, and only, one reason why Obama has not shown either his "vault" birth certificate, a copy of his original birth certificate, or a current COLB:
The absence of a birth record means that Obama cannot prove that he was born in the U.S.A. -- the most important qualification for POTUS.
The battle over the birth certificate is still the #1 issue that will bring down Obama.
Sorry, didn’t mean to scorch you. I am just frustrated. It is not the fact that Obama is or isn’t telling lies, hiding facts of his birth, or anything else. It is the fact that he has come this far with no one vetting him.
I grieve for our country.
Why should I read some stinking blog!
It’s just some AHs personal rant.
My letter to George W. Bush:
Dear President Bush:
You are the Commander-in-Chief and chief law-enforcement officer of the United States, and I would urge you to immediately act according to your pledge to protect the Constitution: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
What I think is that you need to defend the United States from those who are trashing the Constitution.
I think you need to step forward and say that it is your responsibility to enforce the laws of the United States, that the Constitution is our most basic law, and further, that you will perform the constitutional test of Barack Obama’s candidacy for president yourself.
Mr. President, you have the power to do this. You are the chief enforcement officer of all the laws of the United States. Please do your duty to stop the trashing of our basic law.
You are the man who can make this thing right - at least until we get the judges, the media, and the people weaned off the Kool-Aid. Please let me know if I can help you in any way, but I need YOU to help our country - it’s either that or we can kiss it goodbye.
(I signed with my complete contact information)
It's breathtaking, isn't it?
The appeals should be interesting.
I knew there were several others underway- I haven't read them, have you? Do any seem better suited for a favorable ruling?
Screw you AH!
There are currently lawsuits in nine different states on this subject. The lawsuits allege that the Secretaries of State failed to uphold their respective duties as the officials in charge of elections when they did not certify/verify that Barack Obama is eligible to be on the ballot as a presidential candidate.
I don’t know what will come from these suits, but I suspect that time is too short for anyone to do anything before the election. The ballots have been printed and distributed to all counties/cities. They cannot be reprinted and redistributed in time for the election.
Greta Van Sustren has publicly called for all of the candidates to release their birth certificates, but only because she’s sick of all of the e-mails on this subject.
Bill O’Reilly has called this issue “Internet garbage” and refuses to investigate it or even discuss it with Berg on the air.
:) No offense taken- and believe me, I share your frustration.
I knew I was in for some flaming this morning anyway- I flat out have problems with the people in the limelight bringing these issues to attention (Berg, Martin and Corsi).
Regardless- Obama has lied, is lying, and will continue to lie to us. And we watch grown adults who should know better get sucked in by him.
God help us.
How fast can we do a class action suit, asking everyone in the country to sign online somewhere if they want to know whether Barack H. Obama is eligible to be President of the United States of America by virtue of his natural birth?
I personally believe he was born in Hawaii and eligible, but I’d still like to know for sure.
I say, hell yes.
Would it be possible, if Obama won the election, for a strong red state to sue the federal government if they were being forced to have a President that did not meet the requirements to be President, under our great Constitution, upon which all our laws are based?
Bush will never do this. Not in a million years.
....."Remember the Obama girl from Texarkana being swept under the carpet....The Thought Police....
I want to file a counter complaint that false charges were made, that a false report was given to a peace officer. The Secret Service told me I cannot because they will protect the identity of the complainant. I also want the file they have on me destroyed and I want to know that my phone isn't tapped, etcetera. I am hearing a lot of 'Out of my Jurisdiction'.
Do I also hear jackboots?
Jessica Hughes Lufkin, Texas"
It is time to buy this book: Mark Levin authored the bestselling book, Men In Black: How The Supreme Court Is Destroying America (ISBN 0-89526-050-6), in which Levin claims that members of the judicial branch have "legislated from the bench."
(No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.)
In the city of Al Capone everything is possible!
I assume he sneaked through the cracks by the help of that city's ilks because of the racist's "no-touch" issue and was accepted on face value!!
Has there ever been such a screwed up criminal offense in the history of our 230 (something) Presidential election with million$ of million$ of dollar$ unaccounted for from Islamic/Jihadists nations to tilt this election. It is mind boggling we allow this to happen to our country!!!
As a TEACHER..(?)...you just gave thousands of Freepers here the stamp that we are NOT respectable persons!!!
Here's what SHOULD happen. A secretary of state should inform the candidate that he has until Thursday at noon to prove that he is a "natural born" citizen. If the candidate refuses or is unable to do so, the secretary of state should declare that that candidate's votes will not be counted.
The party has four days to put out the word about writing in another name. I would assume for the dems that would be Hillary Clinton.
The system must work in favor of the voter's rights to an honest election. The elected officials, judges, and candidates must be held to that expectation.
The tragedy of the Penn ruling is that a judge could have done by that by just deciding against a person who ignored the proceedings and refused to produce a simple document. Had 1 judge done so by now, it would have given the party more days to reposition it's messages to the voters.
Is there not ONE Secretary of State willing to stand up and be counted?
This situation is grieving me.
If we let them know we expect a resolution, they will get it done.
I’ll call also. Think I’ll call Feinstein’s office as well. She is “supposed” to represent me too (although I have never voted for her).
The DNC liberals are an incurable disease until death!
My (D) mother-in-law would never allow any black person to be invited to the family Xmas parties, until I married her then also (D) daughter (not anymore) and I refused to show up if I could NOT invite my black prayer partners, which she reluctantly agreed to. (BTW I think granny in Hawaii feels same way about Michelle Ma Bell)!!
My mother-in-law an avid Clinton supporter is NOW voting for a "black" man, go figure!!!
I would say its about a quarter-till “torches and pitchforks”
Actually, although my liberal white brother will be going Obama, surprisingly my very Union, Democrat Father and mother in law are both voting McCain. They have never voted for a Republican in their lives.
Usually at our church there are about 1/3 of the people voting Democrat, but I can’t find a single one of them who are not voting for McCain. I had a lot of long (sometimes loud) conversations regarding Clinton, Kerry, etc. but can’t find ANYONE willing to defend Obama. Even the ones I could just about guarantee would go Democrat are not.
For what it is worth.
Great. We need calls and e-mails to every secretary of state. I don’t know why there aren’t suits in all 50 states. I have noticed that democrats are filing the suits.
Unfortunately I believe that this country will be a socialist country very soon. If not in this election, then certainly soon thereafter. We have allowed ourselves to be battered into submission by all of this politically correct crap, by the minorities taking rights over the majority, by electing lawyers into government instead of business men/women, by subjugating ourselves to those who graduated from the liberal colleges, by allowing liberal professors and teachers to ‘train’ our children, by letting God be moved out of our government and public lives, by allowing history to be rewritten according to the liberal view, by condoning bad behavior in our leaders through apathy or ignorance, by not standing together on important issues such as this one....insuring that our political candidates are qualified, by listening to the brainwashing of the MSM, by being manipulated by force from the liberal side. The only thing I am going to enjoy (should I live long enough) in a socialist society is watching those who have lived their lives off the backs of others having to do community service, etc...because everyone contributes in a socialist society. I am terribly sad that we have lazy people in our society who just will not face the truth and the reality of what is happening. I am very happy in my own selfishness to know that my life happened during the days of the greatest country on earth. I am very very unhappy to know that my child and all like her and their children will not know this wonder....this wonder named the United States of America. God has indeed shown His grace on thee.
Most people don't think that is possible. My wife has certainly experienced that with her divorce case!!!
I am a poll worker and I am considering backing out and not participating in the election. It is something I am thinking about. I have never experienced this type of situation, but I will stand on my own personal ethics and make a decision.
I sent emails requesting help to Rush, Boortz, Hannity, Greta. I said ALL candidates need to produce an accurate and real copy of their birth certificates as filed in their respective states. I am going to email the Florida Secretary of State and the Director of the office of elections and President Bush. I learned a long time ago when trying to get another issue addressed in Washington that unless you are a resident of the state you are writing, they will not pay any attention to what you say.
After hearing the Savage Nation, I e-mailed our Secretary with copy to his boss Charlie Crist with the link to Micheal Savage's interview with Mr. Berg:
If somebody can get this link posted correctly, I will appreciate it!!!
Pretty sad...and sophomoric.
The media calls us "MEAN SPIRITED" on anything we do, yet they can literally destroy a person, humiliate them at will and they never feel any remorse.
This smells of PAYOFF big time for this judge, how conveniently it came when the culprit was out of DODGE, thereby it would not be connected to him. Convenient to that his granny got SO SICK.
Basically this Judge says "WE the people have no constitutional authority to file a case, HUH? Who else but us was the Constitution created for. HE was paid off.
Look what they are doing to SARA and JOE the Plumber, unmercifully attempting to destroying their lives. These little people have to be SHUT UP and NOW, or the little people POWER WILL GROW. The media and hollyweird bastards continue to do their little minion jobs, good little soldiers for the Islamic/Socialist cause.
THIS JUDGE was in my opinion PAID OFF BIG TIME, and Obama has more from where that came from, open spigot.
Time for the LITTLE PEOPLE MOVEMENT TO GROW. GO Joe the Plumber's everywhere, Joe the Electrician, Joe the Fireman, etc, etc., etc. Time for them to run for office and destroy that nest of Washington VIPERS before it is to late. If not perhaps we need to watch Independence Day again and start over.
The judge is saying that only the government can determine if the constitution has been violated.
Our Founders created the Constitution to limit the Government.
The need for US Constitution is the same as the need for Lindburghs plane.
Move the Constitution to the Smithsonian.
The Constitution says that no person below age 221 who is not a naturalized born citizen may become President. It is the right and duty of all citizens to ensure that the Constitution is followed. Unfortunately, courts have for a long time been ignoring that fact in order to shield an increasingly-lawless government from scrutiny.
Regarding standing, how can the court say that a voter does not have standing when we, the people, are the government (of the people, by the people and for the people)? When We the People of the United States form our government and Amendment X plainly states that, The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people, who does have standing? If I am not mistaken, the power to vette is not delineated in the Constitution, thereby reserving that power to the States or the people.
If a Canadian child came with his parents into New York State from Toronto and upon reaching the age of 18 became an American citizen, assuming he never told anyone he was originally born a Canadian and in his mid-40’s decided to run for President, is any proof required of Constitutional eligibility in order to file for candidacy, obtain petition signatures, declare candidacy or get on a ballot?
Kev, big ditto here. with the kind of money that Obama has, a lot of people can be bought, bribed, or threatened.
We need to force the issue with the MSM -- maybe stage an active boycott of the news, a boycott of their advertisers, and a boycott of the station.
Start with the news show that has the lowest Neilsen ratings.
Wouldn’t anyone who is eligible to vote have standing?
I don’t think Obama has enough bucks to get to the Supreme Court. So the fact that Berg is appealing to the supremes is good news. Also, how can the MSM pretend this story doesn’t exist any more?
***Obama got to him.
Kev, big ditto here.
***By the way, my theory is similar with the API folks. I think they have a tape of Michelle Obama and they are simply trying to shake down Obama for cash. In order for him to know they mean business, they have to prove to him that they can look like fools for the right amount of money. So they keep stringing everyone along, looking like Nigerian scam artists. I’m looking at that story with this skewed perspective and wondering when the other shoe will drop — they’ll have to say there were technical difficulties, or it sounded like Michelle O but was someone else. They’ll only do that when they have the cash in hand, and I’m not sure that’s taken place just yet. Otherwise, they wouldn’t have been negotiating with Fox News.