Skip to content

Keyes v. Obama: Legal Action Filed in CA Federal Court Based on Executive Order

On Friday, January 16, President George W. Bush’s recent Executive Order on reinvestigating individuals at the federal level. According to RovingPatrol bog, this Order could be another way to approach the President-Elect’s many legal issues. It is also thought that OK State Rep. Mike Ritze may be pushing some things at the State level.

The best part? Activist, agitator of the elites, dentist and attorney Dr. Orly Taitz has today filed suit in the Federal Court of the Central District of California for a writ of Mandamus, declaratory Relief and Injunctive Relief on the issue of the President-Elect’s eligibility for the presidency.

Here’s the presser:

For immediate release01.19.09. Based on the executive order issued by President George w. Bush on the 01.16.09., a legal action is being filed in the Federal Court in the Central District of California. The executive order provides for Reciprocity and Reinvestigation of Individuals in positions of public trust. Section 2 (e), provides for investigation of required level of character and conduct. On behalf of Ambassador Dr. Alan Keyes, Wiley S. Drake and Markham Robinson attorney Orly Taitz has filed a legal action for a writ of Mandamus, declaratory Relief and Injunctive Relief on the issue of legitimacy for presidency of Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Obama aka Barry Soetoro and directing Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, Director of FBI Robert Mueller, and director of Personnel Michael Hager to provide all necessary documentation in regards to Mr. Obama’s (Soetoro’s) legitimacy for presidency and US citizenship. 

Dr. Orly Taitz Esq

The complete case follows…

Update: Justia docket.

Update: Upon closer inspection of the Executive Order by other readers/bloggers, it would appear that the second to the last paragraph might be a tricky thorn, as it were, with which Dr. Taitz may have to deal:

(d) This order is intended only to improve the internal management of the executive branch and is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its agencies, instrumentalities, or entities, its officers, employees or agents, or any other person.

Of course, EOs cannot be legislative by nature (only Congress can write law), so it cannot be construed as providing new enforceable law with which to carry out that Order’s purpose. It’ll be interesting to see how the Judiciary treats this case as such.

However, Dr. Taitz could accomplish other initiatives via this posting.

Update: Speaking of legalities and such, RovingPatrol blog thinks that the incoming Administration may have broken federal code RE: Jill Biden on Oprah.

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Santa Ana Division

Alan Keyes, PhD., Wiley S. Drake, and Markham Robinson,

Plaintiffs

v.

Barack H. Obama, a/k/a Barack H. Obama, II a/k/a Barry Obama, a/k/a Barry Soetoro; Condoleeza Rice, in her capacity as Secretary of State; Robert Mueller, in his capacity as Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; and Michael W. Hager, in his capacity as Acting Director, Office of Personnel Management; and DOES 1-100
Defendants.

Civil Action No.

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY ACTION, INJUNCTION, AND COMMON LAW WRIT OF ALTERNATIVE MANDAMUS 

Plaintiffs, Alan Keyes, PhD., a resident of the State of Maryland, and Wiley S. Drake, and Markham Robinson, each a resident of the State of California, all Petitioners herein, sue Defendants, Barack H. Obama, a/k/a Barack H. Obama, II, a/k/a Barry Soetoro, a/k/a Barry Obama; Condoleeza Rice, in her capacity as Secretary of State; Robert Mueller, in his capacity as Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; and Michael W. Hager, in his capacity as Acting Director, Office of Personnel Management; and allege:
I.
Parties
1. Alan Keyes, PhD., Plaintiff herein, is the Presidential candidate of the American Independent Party, in the 2008 election, on the California State Ballot; 
2. Dr. Wiley S. Drake, Sr., Plaintiff herein, is the Vice Presidential candidate of the American Independent Party in the 2008 election, on the California State Ballot; 
3. Markham Robinson, Plaintiff herein, is a Certified California Elector of the American Independent Party, Vice Chairman of the America’s Independent Party, and Chairman of the American Independent Party);
4. Defendant Barack H. Obama, II, a/k/a Barry Soetoro, a/k/a Barry Obama, (hereafter ‘Obama’) appeared on the California ballot as a presidential candidate in the presidential election of November, 2008.
5. Defendant Condoleeza Rice is the appointed and acting Secretary of State of the United States, and as such is charged with and has the care, custody and control of passports and passport records for the United States of America, and is charged with enforcement of immigration. 8 USC 1104 provides in part:

“Sec. 1104. Powers and duties of Secretary of State

(a) Powers and duties

The Secretary of State shall be charged with the administration and 
the enforcement of the provisions of this chapter and all other 
immigration and nationality laws relating to (1) the powers, duties, and 
functions of diplomatic and consular officers of the United States, 
except those powers, duties, and functions conferred upon the consular 
officers relating to the granting or refusal of visas; (2) the powers, 
duties, and functions of the Administrator; and (3) the determination of 
nationality of a person not in the United States. He shall establish 
such regulations; prescribe such forms of reports, entries and other 
papers; issue such instructions; and perform such other acts as he deems 
necessary for carrying out such provisions. He is authorized to confer 
or impose upon any employee of the United States, with the consent of 
the head of the department or independent establishment under whose 
jurisdiction the employee is serving, any of the powers, functions, or 
duties conferred or imposed by this chapter or regulations issued 
thereunder upon officers or employees of the Department of State or of 
the American Foreign Service.

(b) Designation and duties of Administrator

The Secretary of State shall designate an Administrator who shall be 
a citizen of the United States, qualified by experience. The 
Administrator shall maintain close liaison with the appropriate 
committees of Congress in order that they may be advised regarding the 
administration of this chapter by consular officers. The Administrator 
shall be charged with any and all responsibility and authority in the 
administration of this chapter which are conferred on the Secretary of 
State as may be delegated to the Administrator by the Secretary of State 
or which may be prescribed by the Secretary of State, and shall perform 
such other duties as the Secretary of State may prescribe.

(c) Passport Office, Visa Office, and other offices; directors

Within the Department of State there shall be a Passport Office, a 
Visa Office, and such other offices as the Secretary of State may deem 
to be appropriate, each office to be headed by a director. The Directors 
of the Passport Office and the Visa Office shall be experienced in the 
administration of the nationality and immigration laws.”

6. Defendant Robert Mueller is the appointed and acting Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation is charged with law enforcement and investigations, among other things, in the areas of elections, governmental corruption, and terrorist acts against the United States of America, and has broad investigative powers in order to perform its duties. 28 USC 535 provides:

“Sec. 535. Investigation of crimes involving Government officers 
and employees; limitations

“(a) The Attorney General and the Federal Bureau of Investigation may 
investigate any violation of Federal criminal law involving Government 
officers and employees–
(1) notwithstanding any other provision of law; and
(2) without limiting the authority to investigate any matter 
which is conferred on them or on a department or agency of the 
Government.

“(b) Any information, allegation, matter, or complaint witnessed, 
discovered, or received in a department or agency of the executive 
branch of the Government relating to violations of Federal criminal law 
involving Government officers and employees shall be expeditiously 
reported to the Attorney General by the head of the department or 
agency, or the witness, discoverer, or recipient, as appropriate, 
unless–
(1) the responsibility to perform an investigation with respect 
thereto is specifically assigned otherwise by another provision of 
law; or
(2) as to any department or agency of the Government, the 
Attorney General directs otherwise with respect to a specified class 
of information, allegation, or complaint.

(c) This section does not limit–
(1) the authority of the military departments to investigate 
persons or offenses over which the armed forces have jurisdiction 
under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (chapter 47 of title 10); 
or
(2) the primary authority of the Postmaster General to 
investigate postal offenses.”

7. Defendant Michael W. Hager, in his capacity as Acting Director, Office of Personnel Management is charged with enforcement of the Executive Order referenced below.

II. 
Legal Basis

8. January 16, 2009, President George W. Bush enacted an Executive Order providing for, in part, “Reinvestigating Individuals in Positions of Public Trust.” The Order in its entirety is attached hereto for reference as Exhibit “A.”
9. The Order provides in pertinent part that, “It is necessary to reinvestigate individuals in positions of public trust in order to ensure that they remain suitable for continued employment.” 
10. The Order further provides in pertinent part:
“Sec. 5. Reinvestigation of Individuals in Positions of Public Trust. Individuals in positions of public trust shall be subject to reinvestigation under standards (including but not limited to the frequency of such reinvestigation) as determined by the Director of the Office of Personnel Management, to ensure their suitability for continued employment. 
“Sec. 6. Responsibilities. (a) An agency shall report to the Office of Personnel Management the nature and results of the background investigation and fitness determination (or later changes to that determination) made on an individual, to the extent consistent with law. 
“(b) The Director of the Office of Personnel Management is delegated authority to implement this order, including the authority to issue regulations and guidance governing suitability, or guidance related to fitness, as the Director determines appropriate.” 
11. Article II, Section I of the United States Constitution, states, in pertinent part, as follows: 
“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;” 

12. Title 18 Section 1001, United States Code provides in part:

“Sec. 1001. Statements or entries generally

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any 
matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or 
judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and 
willfully–
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or 
device a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent 
statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same 
to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement 
or entry;

shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if 
the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in 
section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both. If the matter 
relates to an offense under chapter 109A, 109B, 110, or 117, or section 
1591, then the term of imprisonment imposed under this section shall be 
not more than 8 years.”

13. 3 United States Code (U.S.C.) Section 8 provides, “The electors shall vote for President and Vice President, respectively, in the manner directed by the Constitution.” 
14. Constitution Article VI of the Constitution of the United States, at paragraph 2 establishes: “The Constitution . . . . shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby . . .”, preserving the inviolability of Constitution codified in Magna Carta (1215) Sect. 61. The Constitution grants all powers necessary to enforce its inviolability.
15. The right of petition for redress of grievances, securing the Constitution, guarantees each person standing to preserve the inviolability of the Constitution, as preserved in the U.S. Constitution Amendment I, in the Bill of Rights (1689), and as codified in Magna Carta (1215) Sect. 61.

III.
FACTS

16. Plaintiff Markham Robinson is a Certified California Elector of the American Independent Party, Vice Chairman of the America’s Independent Party, and Chairman of the American Independent Party); and has standing to maintain this action based upon the electoral statute quoted above, in that this federal statute confers upon each elector an affirmative duty to discover whether the candidate for President for which the elector is seeking election is a natural born citizen. Otherwise, the elector would not know if his vote was being cast in the “manner directed by the Constitution.”
17. Plaintiffs Alan Keyes, and Wiley S. Drake have standing to pursue this action as the Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates, respectively, of the American Independent Party, in the 2008 election, on the California State Ballot. Furthermore, each plaintiff has standing to uphold the inviolability of the Constitution.
18. Defendant Obama was been elected to the United States Office of the President, and confirmed by electors, without his citizenship being verified or proven. 
19. To assume office, Obama must meet the qualifications specified for the Office of the President of the United States as set forth in the Constitution, which includes that he must be a “natural born” citizen, having sole allegiance to the United States as required to become Commander in Chief.
20. Defendant Obama has failed to demonstrate that he is a “natural born” citizen, and there is evidence leading a reasonable person to believe that it cannot be presumed that he is a natural born citizen, as shall be set forth hereafter.
21. There are other legal challenges before the Federal Courts regarding aspects of lost or dual citizenship concerning Obama. Those challenges, in and of themselves, demonstrate Petitioners’ argument that reasonable doubt exists as to the eligibility of the Democratic Party’s nominee for President. 
22. The Defendants, and all of them, are charged with the care of records, or law enforcement as set forth above.
23. To date, Obama has both failed and refused to provide any documents to the Plaintiffs, the Secretary of State of California, or to the American people, for that matter, any documentation of his eligibility to serve as president of the United States, despite the many reasonable indications that he may lack such eligibility.
24. In his books, which are published and publicly available (‘Dreams of My Father’ and ‘The Audacity of Hope’) Obama has admitted that his father was a citizen of Kenya at the time of his birth. Obama thus had allegiance to Britain at birth.
25. In his books, Obama has admitted the age of his mother at the time of his birth to be 18.
26. In the event that Obama was not born in the United States, according to law at the time of his birth, he is not necessarily a citizen of the United States.
27. In his public comments in San Francisco to a group of voters in 2008, Obama stated that he had traveled to Pakistan in 1981.
28. In 1981 it was not legal for a United States citizen, presenting a United States passport to travel to Pakistan.
29. As a result of this admission, it is reasonable to believe that Obama presented a passport from another country, possibly Indonesia, and therefore, he is arguably not a United States citizen.
30. Plaintiffs reasonably believe that Obama traveled to Pakistan on an Indonesian passport as a result of his having been adopted by his step father, Lolo Soetoro, an Indonesian citizen, and taken the name of ‘Barry Soetoro’ in or around 1967.
31. Records show that Lolo Soetoro registered one ‘Barry Soetoro’ in elementary school in Indonesia, declaring his citizenship to be “Indonesian” and religion to be “Muslim”, and Obama admits his sojourn there in his writings. See Exhibit ‘B’ attached.
31. No evidence of any legal name change from ‘Barry Soetoro’ to ‘Barack Obama’ can be located through ordinary public records searches, and so adequate records must be produced and examined to determine whether or not Obama has violated the 18 USC 1001 by providing a false name or an alias in his bid for President of the United States. 
32. From 1945, Indonesia has not allowed dual citizenship and, therefore, Ms. Dunham-Obama-Soetoro, Obama’s mother, had to relinquish her minor son’s U.S. citizenship in order to obtain Indonesian citizenship for him, which would, in itself, give him divided loyalties, a foreign allegiance, and make him ineligible to become President of the United States President. 
33. Additionally, the United States did not allow dual citizenship with Indonesia at that time, as Indonesia did not allow dual citizenship, and it was prohibited by the Hague Convention of 1930, as interfering with the internal affairs of another sovereign country. 
34. Consequently, upon return to the United States in and around 1971-1972, Obama would have been required to go through the then current immigration procedures to regain his U.S. citizenship. There is no record of him ever doing that. Even if he had done so, he would be considered a naturalized citizen, and not a natural born citizen.
35. A Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’ for one Barack Hussein Obama, II, has been posted on the Internet, in an attempt to quiet the concerns of the public, but the document fails to satisfy the burden of proof generated by and sustained by Obama, in that:
a. The original certified long form (“vault”) birth certificate as attested to by multiple witnesses has not been produced, and there has been no mandate from any authority to compel such production; and
b. The document posted on the internet is a scanned document, which could easily be changed or edited, using modern computer technology; and
c. The posted Certification of Live Birth has a different border than that shown on similar certificates produced around the same time by the office of vital records for the state of Hawaii; and
d. Assuming the document to be genuine, there is no prejudice to Obama in production of the original; and
e. The law in Hawaii in 1961, and for all births prior to 1972, (see Chapter 338-178, Hawaii Statutes) provided that a birth could be recorded in Hawaii even if the birth did not occur in Hawaii; and
f. Therefore, a long form (“vault”) birth certificate, showing the hospital where the birth took place, the name of a delivering physician, the witnesses attesting to the certificate, and other pertinent verifying information, and not an abstract certificate is required to demonstrate the birth of Obama in Hawaii.
36. Plaintiffs have been put on notice that there is further evidence available, of which this court could take judicial notice, that places the citizenship and eligibility of Obama in serious question, the facts for such evidence being as follows:
a. On August 21, 2008, Mr. Phillip J. Berg, former Deputy Attorney General of the State of Pennsylvania, filed a legal action against Mr. Obama and the Democratic National Committee. 
b. With his action, and in the subsequent appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States, Mr. Berg provided documents to the effect that Mr. Obama was born in what is now Kenya (the British East African Protectorate of Zanzibar at the time) and that his paternal grandmother was present at his birth. Mr. Obama claims that he was born in Hawaii. 
c. According to statements made by his half-sister, Maya Soetoro Ng, he was born in Kapiolani Hospital in Hawaii. 
d. According to his biography posted on Wikipedia, Senator Obama was born in Queens Hospital in Hawaii. 
e. In the context of this and other cases filed, Mr. Obama has refused to provide his original birth certificate, even though, in his book, Dreams of My Father, page 26, he states, “… I found the article folded between my birth certificate and old immunization records…” which shows that he clearly has his birth certificate, or that he lied in his book. 
d. Particularly telling is the fact that not one single person has come forward, not a doctor, not a nurse, not a hospital administrator, nor anyone else, to state that he or she was present during this birth, except for Obama’s paternal grandmother, who affirmed that she “was present when he was born in Kenya.” 
e. Additionally, when Mr. Berg served subpoenas on the hospitals mentioned above, Mr. Obama refused to sign a consent form that would allow the hospitals to release any of his information. 
f. Instead, Mr. Obama has hired three law firms to defend himself, and has challenged the action by Mr. Berg on a technicality, claiming that an ordinary citizen does not have standing to bring the suit. 
IV.
RELIEF SOUGHT

37. Based upon the above, and in light of the fact that the President of the United States is its chief law enforcement officer, Defendant Obama has the ethical and Constitutional duty to produce records sufficient to demonstrate he is Constitutionally eligible to hold the office of and act as President of the United States.
38. In the absence of such proof, the electoral college having elected Defendant Obama to President elect, the President elect, must be determined to have failed to qualify, whereby the Vice President becomes the Acting President under U.S. Constitution Amendment 20. 
39. Plaintiffs seek the affirmative act of production of documents as against Defendant Obama, to verify that he constitutionally qualifies for the office of President of the United States, and in failure thereof, a direct mandate to the public officials herein named to demand the production of such records from the public and private officials who maintain them; and such other relief as this Court may deem proper.
40. It is the duty of the Defendants Rice and Mueller to use the assets of the people of the United States placed in their control as public guardians to produce or compel production by the holders of such documents, the following: 
a. Original long form (“vault”) Birth Certificate for Barack H. Obama, a.k.a Barry Soetoro, and each and every birth Certificate and subsequent version or any birth Certificate for that person so known at this time, regardless of the name shown thereon or given at birth; and 
b. Any and all emigration and immigration documents, port of entry documents regarding the travels to and from the United States showing the citizenship status and visa status of Barack H. Obama, or Barry Soetoro, or any permutation on those names; and
c. Any and all university and/or college records and/or transcripts that would show the application for admission, the application for financial aid, and the citizenship of one Barack H. Obama, II and/or Barry Soetoro, or any permutation on those names; and
d. Any other such documentation which will cast light upon the truth of the matter.
41. It is the duty of Defendant Hager to comply with the Executive Order cited above.
42. Failing to officially and publicly validate the status of the citizenship claims of Obama will jeopardize the security of the United States, will perpetuate an unconstitutional election to stand in the place of a possibly legal election, cast a pall of doubt on the election process and taint the election results themselves. 
43. Plaintiffs Keyes and Drake have been irreparably harmed by being unable to compete in a fair and unbiased election. 
44. Plaintiff Robinson has been harmed in that he was not be able to perform his duties as an Elector in voting for the candidate that is eligible to become the President of the United States under the law. 
45. Plaintiff Keyes has additionally suffered substantial harm due to the following circumstances:
a. In 2006 Plaintiff Keys was a runner-up in a US senate race from the state of Illinois to Defendant Obama. 
b. If indeed the Obama is not a citizen of the United States, then he is not a legal naturalized citizen either and cannot be a United States senator either. 
c. In this case Plaintiff Keyes would be sworn as a United States senator as a runner up in the prior election. This logically means that Plaintiff Keyes will suffer immediate specific damage without this question being resolved.
First Cause of Action – Declaratory Relief
46. Plaintiffs reallege paragraphs 1 through 45 and pray this Court will declare whether under Article II, Section 1, and Amendment 20 Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution, Defendant Barack H. Obama is a natural born citizen and that Plaintiffs’ attorneys are entitled to a reasonable fee; and 
47. Grant a judgment including costs of this proceeding and fees as are applicable by law; and such further relief as the Court deems just and proper. 

Second Cause of Action – Injunction
48. Plaintiffs reallege paragraphs 1 through 45 and pray this Court will determine that the inauguration set for January 20, 2009 should be stayed pending the outcome of this, and similar litigation, determining that the Plaintiff has a substantial likelihood of success on the merits, that under Article II, Section 1 and Amendment 20 Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution, Defendant Barack H. Obama is not a natural born citizen and has not qualified, and that Plaintiffs’ attorneys are entitled to a reasonable fee; and 
49. Grant a judgment including costs of this proceeding and fees as are applicable by law; and such further relief as the Court deems just and proper. 

Third Cause of Action – Common Law Writ of Mandamus
50. Plaintiffs reallege paragraphs 1 through 45 and pray this Court will find grounds to issue a common law alternative writ of mandamus and thereby direct Defendants Rice, Hager, and Mueller to produce, or compel production of the documents as set forth in paragraph 40 hereof; and 
51. Determine that Plaintiffs’ attorneys are entitled to a reasonable fee; and 
52. Grant a judgment including costs of this proceeding and fees as are applicable by law; and such further relief as the Court deems just and proper. 
Respectfully submitted on January 19, 2009.
_______________________

Date: 01.19.09. 
________________________________________
ORLY TAITZ, Esq. (SBN 223433)
26302 La Paz 
Mission Viejo Ca 92691
Telephone: (949) 683-5411
Facsimile: (949) 586-2082 

Attorney for Plaintiff

16 Comments


  1. Fatal error: Uncaught Error: Call to undefined function ereg() in /srv/users/serverpilot/apps/the-right-side-of-life/public/wp-content/themes/veryplaintxt/functions.php:183 Stack trace: #0 /srv/users/serverpilot/apps/the-right-side-of-life/public/wp-content/themes/veryplaintxt/comments.php(33): veryplaintxt_commenter_link() #1 /srv/users/serverpilot/apps/the-right-side-of-life/public/wp-includes/comment-template.php(1469): require('/srv/users/serv...') #2 /srv/users/serverpilot/apps/the-right-side-of-life/public/wp-content/themes/veryplaintxt/single.php(42): comments_template() #3 /srv/users/serverpilot/apps/the-right-side-of-life/public/wp-includes/template-loader.php(74): include('/srv/users/serv...') #4 /srv/users/serverpilot/apps/the-right-side-of-life/public/wp-blog-header.php(19): require_once('/srv/users/serv...') #5 /srv/users/serverpilot/apps/the-right-side-of-life/public/index.php(17): require('/srv/users/serv...') #6 {main} thrown in /srv/users/serverpilot/apps/the-right-side-of-life/public/wp-content/themes/veryplaintxt/functions.php on line 183