Ankeny upheld a motion to dismiss because the plaintiffs failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. They sued the governor of Indiana and didn't sufficiently support their claim to the court(s) that the governor had a responsibility to vet the eligibility of presidential candidates. Anything beyond that is flufff. The appeal court's flawed rationale over phantom guidance from Wong Kim Ark on natural born citizenship doesn't magically affect whether the governor has a legal responsibility or not. It's an aside. The Indiana Supreme Court doesn't need to consider whether the appeals court was on drugs when it wrote about natural born citizenship, but just on whether the plaintiff sufficiently stated a justiciable claim against the defendant. This has no direct bearing on the cases presented to the U.S. Supreme Court, although they may have failed over similar procedural issues and not how they perceived Obama's eligibilty.
Ankeny upheld a motion to dismiss because the plaintiffs failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. They sued the governor of Indiana and didn’t sufficiently support their claim to the court(s) that the governor had a responsibility to vet the eligibility of presidential candidates. Anything beyond that is flufff. The appeal court’s flawed rationale over phantom guidance from Wong Kim Ark on natural born citizenship doesn’t magically affect whether the governor has a legal responsibility or not. It’s an aside. The Indiana Supreme Court doesn’t need to consider whether the appeals court was on drugs when it wrote about natural born citizenship, but just on whether the plaintiff sufficiently stated a justiciable claim against the defendant. This has no direct bearing on the cases presented to the U.S. Supreme Court, although they may have failed over similar procedural issues and not how they perceived Obama’s eligibilty.
The way to remove a president is via impeachment in the House and trial and conviction in the Senate.
However the Indiana Court of Appeals went a step further than simply stating that the plaintiffs had no standing to sue. They laid out a definitive position that Article 2, Section 1 has nothing to do with whether one’s parents are American citizens or not, as long as the president himself was born in the United States.
Thus far no court, federal or state, original jurisdiction or appeals has taken a divergent position.
As a conservative federal judge (Chief Judge Royce Lamberth), appointed by Ronald Reagan said in dismissing birther attorney Orly Taitz’s quo warranto suit: “This is one of several such suits filed by Ms. Taitz in her quixotic attempt to prove that President Obama is not a natural born citizen as required by [the] Constitution. See U.S. Const. art. II, § 1. This Court is not willing to go tilting at windmills with her.”
NO court has been willing to do tilting at windmills with birthers.