This doesn't add up. Something Stinks.
The administrative judge said he would have ruled for the plaintiff by default, but the defense wanted to put the matter in public record. So they allowed the case to be decided on its merits.
According the judge, the case did not have enough.
You are exactly right, something DOES stink!! FReeper butterdezillion educated me about how judge Malihi (ethnic origins unknown) used sharia law to rule in zero's favor. Here's how she put it to me: Malihi just used a sharia standard of evidence (none needed) to give Obama a favorable ruling, which is also bad precedent.
If people realize that it is a ruling allowed by sharia rather than by US judicial standards, it will help people realize where all this is coming from and where it is headed.
Those who have no problem with this legal evidentiary standard are supporting the same kinds of things that sharia has allowed all over the world. This isn’t just some tee-hee stupid “birther” issue. This is about whether we LITERALLY allow judges to make up their own “facts”.
-snip-
I think Malihi should be made to lie in the bed he’s made, so it can be soundly scoffed and nullified.
I’m just expanding on it to say that the evidentiary standard Malihi used is the same one used to stone women to death and steal property from Coptic Christians in Egypt (etc ad nauseum) without any evidence other than “judge’s knowledge”. And if we allow it here - even if in a case that people want to mock, call racist, or whatever - it plants an acorn that WILL grow into that full-blown tree."
It makes more sense to me this way.