Eligibility Update: Kerchner v. Obama, Goldberg and O’Reilly, Gohmert and HR1503
Linda Bentley of SonoranNews.com reports the following regarding Kerchner v. Obama (excerpted):
…Plaintiffs claim Obama is not an Article II ‘natural born Citizen’ because his father Barack Obama, Sr., who was never a U.S. citizen or even a permanent resident at the time of Obama’s birth in 1961, was a British subject under the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom until 1963, which is when Kenya received its independence and both Obama and his father became Kenyan citizens. …
Because the word “standing” in not found anywhere in the Constitution, Apuzzo maintains the test for “standing” is a judicial invention and stated, “In deciding this case, the court must only consider the allegations of the complaint in the light most favorable to the plaintiff,” adding, “All a litigant must do to demonstrate standing is allege personal injury fairly traceable to the … allegedly unlawful conduct and likely to be redressed by the requested relief.”
The injury need only be an invasion of a legally protected interest that is “concrete and particularized” as well as “actual or imminent,” rather than “conjectural” or “hypothetical.” Defendants argue plaintiffs have not met that standard and cited several cases challenging Obama’s and Sen. John McCain’s “natural born Citizen” status and in which the courts ruled the plaintiffs lacked standing.
Apuzzo said the cited cases were distinguishable because Obama was sued as a candidate and not yet bound to the Constitution, which occurred when he took his oath on Jan. 20, 2009. …
Plaintiffs have not brought a “citizen suit,” seeking to vindicate a general public interest, as defendants suggest, but a redress of their own grievances and injuries. …
“The Constitution of the United States is a contract between the people and the federal government,” stated Apuzzo. “As parties to that contract, the plaintiffs have every constitutional right to demand that the contract be enforced by the judicial branch of government.” …
Apuzzo also pointed out an exception to the standing requirement, whereas a citizen may challenge an action that would otherwise go unchallenged in the courts.
While both McCain and Obama were similarly situated, the Senate investigated the former but not the latter and plaintiffs argue the congressional defendants denied them that equal protection under the law.
If anything, Apuzzo said, Obama, who has refused to produce his birth certificate, prevented public access to medical, educational and travel documents, whose father was born a British subject, and who himself was born a British subject, presented a much more questionable case for establishing Article II “natural born Citizen” status than did McCain, who was born in the Panama Canal Zone to two U.S. citizen parents who were on military duty at the time of his birth.
Apuzzo asserts Congress denied Kerchner equal treatment, based on party loyalty, race (wanting to avoid the appearance of being racist against the first African-American President-elect) or some other unknown factor and put up an “unjust, unequal and discriminatory barrier” to Kerchner’s petition for redress of his grievance. …
He says this cause of action is about a “serious violation of our Constitution,” not a dispute about where Obama was born.
Reporter and analyst Bernard Goldberg was on tonight’s The O’Reilly Factor on FoxNews discussing the birth certificate controversy and how he thinks that the Obama Administration wants the controversy to continue:
And Mary Ann Aker’s blog on The Washington Post opines about Rep. Louie Gohmert’s (R-TX) recent cosponsorship of HR1503:
Does Gohmert believe the conspiracy theorists who argue — despite plenty of evidence to the contrary — that Obama was really born in Kenya, not in Hawaii?
“I don’t know if it’s true or not,” Gohmert told the Sleuth in a telephone interview Wednesday evening. “But I read that Lou Dobbs said [Obama's] original birth certificate was destroyed.” (That would be Lou Dobbs of CNN, who has helped to perpetuate the Internet-fueled rumorthat the copy of Obama’s birth certificate produced by his campaign last year is fraudulent.)
Gohmert says he’s “shocked that people are saying the people who signed onto the bill are conspiracy theorists.” The whole point of the bill, he argues, is to “eliminate all this conspiracy talk.”
He pointed out that questions were raised last year about the true citizenship of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who was born in the Panama Canal Zone.
When reminded that Hawaii government officials had affirmed and reaffirmed this week that Obama was indeed born in Honolulu on August 4, 1961, Gohmert said, “That’s what they say… I don’t know if it’s true or not.”
Gohmert is in the same company as Rep. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), the former No. 2 House Republican who is running for Senate in 2010. Blunt, though not an official co-sponsor of the birther bill, wasvideotaped this week on Capitol Hill by a reporter for the liberal blog Firedoglake questioning Obama’s birth creds.
“What I don’t know is why the president can’t produce a birth certificate,” Blunt said. “I don’t know anybody who can’t produce one. That’s a legitimate question -- no health records, no birth certificate.”
Well, isn’t that something? Apparently Rep. Gohmert and I are of the same mind. I guess that officially makes him a “birther” too, huh? He doesn’t know for sure, but he’s not stopping anyone from trying to get to the truth of the matter… and neither is Rep. Blunt.
Scary (for the opposition), huh?
See the following links regarding the eligibility saga:
- Obama’s Presidential Eligibility: What You Need to Know
- Obama’s Sealed Background Documentation
- What’s the Difference Between a Birth Certification Versus a Birth Certificate?
- Keyes v. Lingle: Forensic Examiner and IT Expert Disprove Certification of Live Birth
- Obama Citizenship Facts
- The State Department and Sen. Patrick Leahy’s (D-VT) Natural Born Citizen Resolution (April 10, 2008)
- Citizen Grand Jury Updates and Eligibility Lawsuit Listing
-Phil
Twitter: @trsol -=- Facebook (TRSoL) -=- Facebook (Rightside Phil)
Photo courtesy HBO.com
sue says:
August 1, 2009 at 4:39 pm
“Jacqlyn Smith says:
August 1, 2009 at 1:54 pm
FOR EARL, BLACK LION AND ANYONE ELSE WHO DOUBTS LARRY IS TELLING THE TRUTH…..I DARE YOU TO ORDER HIS BOOK AND THEN SUE HIM FOR SLANDER AND LIES AGAINST YOUR FRAUD LEADER…..I DOUBLE DARE YOU….HERE IS THE INFO AND NOTICE THE FRAUD IS GETTING ONE FOR HIS BIRTHDAY!!! LOL!!
Post Larry’s new book to order
http://www.larrysinclair-0926.blogspot.com
He is sending one to BHO for his birthday!!”
Wow, you are stalking Earl and Black Lion.
*****************************************************************************
Sue….why did you leave your name off the comment…..Put up or shut up…..I dare you to sue Mr. Sinclair as well!!!!
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105764
Read about the Kenyan BC here!
“Jacqlyn Smith says:
August 1, 2009 at 1:54 pm
FOR EARL, BLACK LION AND ANYONE ELSE WHO DOUBTS LARRY IS TELLING THE TRUTH…..I DARE YOU TO ORDER HIS BOOK AND THEN SUE HIM FOR SLANDER AND LIES AGAINST YOUR FRAUD LEADER…..I DOUBLE DARE YOU….HERE IS THE INFO AND NOTICE THE FRAUD IS GETTING ONE FOR HIS BIRTHDAY!!! LOL!!
Post Larry’s new book to order
http://www.larrysinclair-0926.blogspot.com
He is sending one to BHO for his birthday!!”
Wow, you are stalking Earl and Black Lion.
FOR EARL, BLACK LION AND ANYONE ELSE WHO DOUBTS LARRY IS TELLING THE TRUTH…..I DARE YOU TO ORDER HIS BOOK AND THEN SUE HIM FOR SLANDER AND LIES AGAINST YOUR FRAUD LEADER…..I DOUBLE DARE YOU….HERE IS THE INFO AND NOTICE THE FRAUD IS GETTING ONE FOR HIS BIRTHDAY!!! LOL!!
Post Larry’s new book to order
http://www.larrysinclair-0926.blogspot.com
He is sending one to BHO for his birthday!!
BL,
Maybe in your book Olsen is a conservative. He recently filed a lawsuit against Prop 8 in California.
We have not nearly exhausted legitimate judicial causes of action to redress BO’s problematic Presidency.
THEORIZING HOW TO PROVE BO IS NOT A NBC
Black Lion, Larry Tribe may be cleverer than he is smart. Obviously, based on the fact, Panama always remained sovereign and, the U.S. was only granted an administratorship of the area affiliated with the construction and upkeep of the Panama Canal; being born on this foreign soil means, Senator McCain is not a NBC. So then, why did Professor Tribe parse his words to say that, “[B]ased on the original meaning of the Constitution, the Framers’ intentions, and subsequent legal and historical precedent, Senator McCain’s birth to parents who were U.S. citizens, serving on a U.S. military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936, makes him a “natural born Citizen” within the meaning of the Constitution.” (Notice how he never said, JMc was born on that military base.)
TRIBE FUDGES OPINION ON MCCAIN NATURAL BORN CITIZENSHIP
Here’s an analysis published in a law review, clearly explaining that John McCain cannot be said to be a NBC because, technically, citizenship was not bestowed upon him by U.S. law until shortly before his 1st birthday. MCCAIN NOT BORN IN THE USA
Perhaps the lure of a seat on the high court clouded Professor Tribe’s legal analysis.
P.S. Re: “esteemed scholars” – depending on which side of the fence one is rooting for and such examples you offer certainly point to which side. Tribe doesn’t have the title of “Harvard Law’s Liberal Lion” for nothing. Perhaps a “liberal pussycat” might be a little bit more acceptable, but “lion’?!!!
And Olsen too has leapt the fence.
More culture warrior examples than anything objectively speaking.
Black Lion: Apuzzo and Donofrio can try but they only have “opinions from their own particular ideology” also.
And just what is Donofrio’s “ideology” … in your, um, opinion?!! As far as motivation goes, he’s been all over the place. Along the way he appears to keep refining even his own discoveries. One cannot say the same about your own.
observer says:
July 31, 2009 at 1:01 pm
Black Lion: Harvard Law Professor Laurence H. Tribe and former Solicitor General (under Bush) Theodore B. Olson issued the following statement regarding their opinion on what is a Natural Born Citizen and it’s effect on John McCain. These are well respected legal scholars. Inadvertently they also defined it for President Obama.
So what. Precedent cases top “opinions” even from those “anoited”, chosen according to one’s own particular ideology!
__________________________________________________________________
Agreed…And precedent cases like Perkins v, Elg, Wong Kim Ark, and the 14th amendment support the fact that President Obama is a Natural Born Citizen…Apuzzo and Donofrio can try but they only have “opinions from their own particular ideology” also. The point was that there are more esteemed legal scholars out there that have a different opinion than Apuzzo, Donofrio, Orly, and Berg. And Olsen is a conservative.
Concerned Citizen wrote:
Have you been expressing that for years, or is just when your cause is losing that the time-honored principle of standing bothers you? Eligibility deniers pretend to be champions of the Constitution and the rule of law, but that’s opposite to reality. The want established law set aside when it thwarts their particular interests.
Motion day is near, and I don’t think the plaintiffs have any serious chance. Apuzzo is arguing what he thinks the law should be, while the U.S. Attorneys are arguing what the law is.
Georgetown,
Unfortunately, that’s not a directly cited source. It references hearsay that has no apparent supporting documentation.
Be wary of uncited rumors.
-Phil
speedy:
You’re offended by the wrong word. “Theory” is actually a good thing. It’s the “conspiracy” part that is pejorative.
A “theory” is a framework of ideas that explain facts. The most powerful ideas in all of science are theories. Theories explain facts, they never become facts.
So you accidentally are part way correct. It would not be a theory if he said himself he was governed by the UK at birth and became a Kenyan citizen. That would be (if he really said it) “a fact.”
Your problem is the specific theory that you use to explain it (and the other facts) associated with the Birther narrative. And the theory you use is a conspiracy theory.
marge:
Just to help you deal with some of the confusion you are experiencing. The following comments are not mere speculation.
Registration numbers are assigned in the order that births are registered, not in the order that babies are born. Obama was born on a Friday at 7:24 PM. The Nordyke twins were born the next day, Saturday. The first “working day” for the clerks who would register the births was first thing Monday morning, August 7.
Think for a moment of how stacks of paper are first built and how they are then later processed, and you have your answer.
This is the essentially the same thing that happened to Obama’s SSS Record Locator Number. The original forms (such as the Nordyke certificates) are 20th century. The COLB is 21st century.
The extra (millennial) digits were added because of Y2K, and you will only find them on the computer generated COLBs. Obama’s long form will (like the twins’) only have the 2 digit year. If the Nordyke twins were to ask for another copy of their birth certificates now, they would get COLBs with the 4 digit year.
That’s why you also see an extra digit on the recent computer printout of Obama’s SSS record issued in the 21st century vs. the original 20th century document. Y2K.
deedee wrote:
Keep in mind reality. While you can sign WND’s on-line petition as often you want, for a march you’d actually have to get that many people to show up.
Incidentally, The Washington D.C. event attendance record was set just this year, on January 20′th.
The “D-ither’ is blackmailed then! That’s what they said would happen.
So, a usurper makes it to office, essentially undermining and removing the special RIGHT to certain citizens of the United States.
In other words, Natural Born Citizens have had their Natural Born Citizen RIGHT infringed on because there is no more distinction between an Amendment XIV Citizen/foreigner and an NBC.
How’s that for standing???
Link; Second to last comment:
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/2008-presidential-election/TNBORUA0OLNPVF9RM#lastPost
Something that I don’t understand why it hasn’t been brought into the argument against sealed documents/history of this “president” is the pronounced concern of recent history about the hidden health background of some of our presidents i.e. Kennedy, Roosevelt, Eisenhower. This more recent grave concern about these hidden health facts has centered around the possible real security endangerment of the country with a “wounded” president. (there is the additional concern of blackmail) And this concern deals with history rather than some annual doctor’s report. We know of various world leaders who have purposefully hidden, through their doctors, vital medical conditions/history from their citizens.
Shouldn’t even the doubting conservative media at least share such concern with purposefully hidden records – perhaps the greatest amount of secrecy in our history in their amount.
Black Lion: Harvard Law Professor Laurence H. Tribe and former Solicitor General (under Bush) Theodore B. Olson issued the following statement regarding their opinion on what is a Natural Born Citizen and it’s effect on John McCain. These are well respected legal scholars. Inadvertently they also defined it for President Obama.
So what. Precedent cases top “opinions” even from those “anoited”, chosen according to one’s own particular ideology!
Georgetown,
Please cite your source.
-Phil
Jim Delaney,
Further news is coming.
-Phil
Found this interesting comment:
Sure there’s evidence that Obama’s not a natural born citizen. He was turned down for US. financial aid when he went to undergraduate school. He got a letter from the US. Department of Education saying he was unintitiled to the Federal aid because he wasn’t a US. citizen. This letter was signed by the Dept. of Education Secretary during the Reagan administration. Obama’s picture on NNDB website was the picture he sent to his undergrad. school when he did the whole application package, including his financial aid form. That’s why his school sealed his records – they can either eat from the trough or be threatened by his imperial presidency by losing all their government aid (research dollars) from divulging this information……
The Director of the FBI refuses to have his agency politicized, so if he sits on the ciphers and Obama as an acct of spite tries to fire him, he will just release the information to the public. All of this is going behind the scenes, but if you see Obama clearly not discussing certain topics like Iran during a press conference, that means he is *uninformed* for a reason…
Looks like he was born abroad…
Harvard Law Professor Laurence H. Tribe and former Solicitor General (under Bush) Theodore B. Olson issued the following statement regarding their opinion on what is a Natural Born Citizen and it’s effect on John McCain. These are well respected legal scholars. Inadvertently they also defined it for President Obama.
“The Constitution does not define the meaning of “natural born Citizen.” The U.S. Supreme Court gives meaning to terms that are not expressly defined in the Constitution by looking to the context in which those terms are used; to statutes enacted by the First Congress…. and to the common law at the time of the Founding….These sources all confirm that the phrase “natural born” includes both birth abroad to parents who were citizens, and birth within a nation’s territory and allegiance….”
” If the Panama Canal Zone was sovereign U.S. territory at the time of Senator McCain’s birth, then that fact alone would make him a “natural born” citizen under the well-established principle that “natural born” citizenship includes birth within the territory and allegiance of the United States…Premising “natural born” citizenship on the character of the territory in which one is born is rooted in the common-law understanding that persons born within the British kingdom and under loyalty to the British Crown–including most of the Framers themselves, who were born in the American colonies–were deemed natural born subjects.”
Letter by Theodore Olson and Laurence Tribe, reported in 154 Cong. Rec. S3645-46 (Apr. 30, 2008).
Also there is an analysis by the following legal scholars regarding this issue of John McCain and his eligibility to be President. Again their argument and definition of what constitutes a “natural born citizen” is extremely germane to the issue in regards to President Obama.….The following paragraph is of interest to the discussion…
“There are two basic paradigms of acquiring citizenship: by birth, and by naturalization. The Immigration and Nationality Act currently in effect defines “naturalization” to mean “the conferring of nationality of a state upon a person after birth, by any means whatsoever.” There should therefore be no doubt that a “natural born Citizen” as described in Article II of the Constitution is one who acquired U.S. citizenship at birth, and not through naturalization. The law of naturalization is therefore not discussed in any detail here.
http://www.ssbb.com/index.php/publications/entry/90
This shows that legal and constitutional scholars, more versed in the law than Apuzzo and Donofrio interpret the law and the Constitution regarding eligibility for the Presidency and what constitutes a “natural born citizen” much differently.
Why don’t we just make it a bither’s march on 9/12 in DC too then. Have signs ready “WHERE’S THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE?” How the MSM think if they see millions of the “where’s the BC” signs?
It really bothers me that the Federal courts hide behind this made up concept of standing to avoid that which they don’t want to consider. Since we are all injured by the current situation what about a class action lawsuit – the class being the citizens of the
United States?
I am tired of these people trying to protect the usurper and say we are theorists. It is not a theory that he said himself he was governed by the UK at birth and became a Kenyan citizen. There is dual citizenship at best no matter where he was born. He is a racist himself. He is the worst black person to put up in the white house. There are so many other black people who are natural born and not racists, who would be good people. There is no room for racism and race baiting in the government. Usurper BO has to go! He is the biggest liar, biggot, evil person to ever step foot in the white house. I hope that a judge will finally hear the merits of this. It is getting old. We don’t necessarily needs his BC, we have his own words on fight the smears.
The time lines, places, actions, motives, when analyzed, support, and are consistent with, what is the answer to the Obama birth puzzle:
Obama’s grandmother is his mother and his mother is his sister.
Think about it. Review all the facts and claims.
Lou Dobbs has retracted his statement that Obama’s bith certificate has been destroyed.
Images of two Aug 5,1961 birth certificates of the twin daughters born to Eleanor Nordyke at Kapi’olani Maternity Hospital, one day after Obama was supposedly born at the same hospital have now been revealed.
The Honolulu Advertiser published photostats of the original long-form birth certificates of the twins. The Nordykes’ certificates include the name of the hospital, the name of the attending physician, Name and address of the parents.
A close examination of the birth certificates of the twins shows the registration number precedes the number given Obama, even though the Obama was born a day earlier. Obama was given a higher registration number. The middle figure in Obama’s purported registration also is different that the Twins, and his birth was registered with the Hawaii registar three days earlier, Aug. 8, 1961.
The middle figure in Obama’s purported registration also is different from the Nordykes’ Obama’s is 1961,indicating the year, while the Mordykes is merely 61.
The article containing the information that I have just written was on – World Net Daily 7/29/2009. http://www.wnd.com/indeax.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageld=105347, Under the heading Unveiled! Hawaiis 1961 long-form birth certificates.
Please look for yourselves and see the difference.
Do I sense a ray of hope afterall. If so, you deserve a great deal of the credit, Phil.
Will await further developments with baited breath.
Suborned in the U.S.A.
The birth-certificate controversy is about Obama’s honesty, not where he was born.
By Andrew C. McCarthy
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZmJhMzlmZWFhOTQ3YjUxMDE2YWY4ZDMzZjZlYTVmZmU=&w=MA
From Wikipedia: Andrew C. McCarthy is a former Assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York. He was most notable for leading the 1995 terrorism prosecution against Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman and eleven others. The defendants were convicted of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and planning a series of attacks against New York City landmarks.[1] He also contributed to the prosecutions of terrorists who bombed US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, resigning from the Justice Department in 2003.
I can’t stand it when I get to the end of your emails. I want more. I know, things take time. I will be going to Washington DC Sept. 11 – 13.