I think you ought to realize by now that none of these court challenges is going to remove Obama from office or prevent him from running again. Judges have great discretionary powers, and they will use them.
IMO, it is folly to presume to know how any court will rule.
Malihi’s ruling was pathetic on its face. He resorted to citing dicta from an Indiana state appeals court. I expect the Democrap jurists in Fulton Co. to at least pretend to rely directly on a SCOTUS ruling to affirm Barry's eligibility.
I find it extremely telling that between the Ankeny court and Malihi, NO SCOTUS precedent subsequent to WKA has been cited to affirm that Barry is NBC...because there isn't any such case. Even the Ankeny panel stated that the WKA court did NOT declare WKA to be NBC, contrary to Obot claims.
So, any judge can rule contrary to the Constitution of the United States?
And they will all use them in the same direction. They will bend any precedent, ignore any rule, create new ones on the spot, and do whatever it takes to make sure THEY don't have to go down in History as the one who kept the first black Precedent off the ballot.
None of this is about law, this is all about covering their @ss.
You are likely right, but the effort still must be made.
Why?
So....History can permanently record the names of the cowardly traitors who **refused** to honor their oaths taken before God to defend the Constitution.
I think you ought to realize by now that none of these court challenges is going to remove Obama from office or prevent him from running again. Judges have great discretionary powers, and they will use them.
We the people have more power than the judiciary, president or ‘congress, their powers derive from us, we the people. See American Revolution and US Civil War for previous demonstrations of who has the power.