Georgia Obama Ballot Challenge Results

by Phil on 02/6/2012

Judge Malihi came back with his decision that he is recommending to GA’s SoS that Obama is eligible to be on the State’s ballot.

Attorney Irion’s response.

A few things to note:

  • Judge Malihi decided to use dicta from a previous case in Indiana (Ankeny) as the main deciding factor of presidential natural born citizenship, even though a footnote in Judge Malihi’s decision disclaims that the Ankeny ruling didn’t actually define natural born citizenship
  • Dr. Taitz, rather ironically, did not actually vet the “experts” to whom she turned with respect to allegedly debunking Obama’s posted birth certificates, Social Security number, etc. Therefore, Judge Malihi rejected virtually all of that evidence en mass as being “unpersuasive”
  • Mr. Irion, as was expected, will be appealing this recommendation to the Georgia Appellate Court

On one hand, I am absolutely happy that a Court — via previously-legislated State statute — has taken up the basic — though not exhaustive – merits of presidential eligibility. This has forced even the opposition to such questioning to continuously move the proverbial goalposts insofar as managing expectations has been concerned.

On the other hand, we still do not have a definitive determination of exactly who qualifies as a natural born citizen with respect to presidential eligibility. As I’ve pointed out previously, even the State Department admits to this, and Judge Malihi did not move the question any further towards definition, as he clearly admits in his own decision.

Time for me to go off the reservation:

What would have happened if many of the previous federal and State-based challenges would not have happened, where the Plaintiffs should have done a better job at researching issues such as standing, subject matter jurisdiction, and the like? While I fully admit to appreciating the copious amounts of energy spent on pushing forward in these cases, after having essentially failed at a handful of them, what evidence was there that n+1 cases were going to succeed?

For one thing, the Ankeny v. Daniels case would never have occurred. What, then, would Judge Malihi have used as a reference point in his own decision?

Would Mr. Jablonski have actually showed up, minus Obama (that would have been slightly more helpful)?

Removing all emotion from the issue, should any other nationwide, State-based ballot challenge go forward, would it not be true that said challenge would simply use Judge Malihi’s decision in the same way that Judge Malihi used the Ankeny dicta, thereby maintain the current inertia of the issue?

Anyone can get pissed off at me all they want regarding what I just said, but sometimes it pays to step back from the issue and regain some perspective. Maybe expending so much energy towards the same process and expecting different results every time doesn’t mean there’s an issue with the Judiciary; it could just mean that you’ve got a bad strategy, and beating your head against the same proverbial brick wall will only open up more wounds.

I’m just sayin’.

-Phil

phil [at] therightsideoflife [dot] com

There are 32 comments in this article:

  1. 02/6/2012kismetique says:

    I couldn’t agree with more your article, Phil. I expected nothing more than what actually occurred. The Judge took the easy way out. I’m sure the thought of ruling against a sitting president gave him nightmares; thus, better to take the safe way out and hook his wagon to the Indiana ruling.

    This will never advance anywhere, because like you point out – I think the strategy is bad. It must be turned around on them and put on the other foot, so to speak. Or the method by which we obtain a true meaning from the courts of NBC might be obtainable if it had nothing to do with Obama at all.

    As far as some of the comments on your other posts, I’m not sure where Bob is coming from. What lies? Basically, there are a lot of opinions out there, and no facts. IN MY OPINION, Obama is not a NBC because his father was not a US Citizen at the time he was born….how is that a lie? Isn’t it basically OPINIONS that take matters into court? One party has one opinion and the other party has another opinion? Doesn’t make either party a liar – they simply disagree.

    Frankly, I think it would benefit both sides to call for a hearing on the real merits. If either side doesn’t want a definitive ruling on NBC, I have to ask myself why? Perhaps they think their side wouldn’t win?!?! If Bob thinks he knows all the FACTS and the rest of us are LIARS, wouldn’t he want it to go to court – ahhh, just image the sweet victory he could savor…..unless maybe the rest of us aren’t LIARS at all.

  2. 02/6/2012slcraig says:

    Phil points out the conundrum that has plagued every attempt to engage the Courts or Federal Departments to acknowledge the required and self-evident nature of the circumstances that coalesce into a distinct instance of citizenship upon the prodigy of American Citizens.

    But he does so by inference and without illumination.

    The fact is there is DECADES of evidence of the desires by many who wish to REDEFINE the Constitutional idiom WITHOUT acknowledging what the ACTUAL original definition was/is.

    Was/is because it has NEVER been Amended, although Judge Gray in WKA would have the readers of his opinion believe that it was, without words in the 14th that said so nor any words that would require it.

    But the conundrum developers in part because of the obfuscating opinions by the courts, by pseudo intellectual treatises and agenda driven avoidance of voicing or pronouncing the original definition with any clarity.

    In other words, there is no acknowledged “Legal” definition of the Constitutional idiom of natural born Citizen , insofar as citizenship is concerned, nor any legislation for any candidate for the office of POTUS/V-POTUS to prove their conformity to the specific need of the Constitution.

    Lacking a Statutory Basis to demand the proof of conformity neither Standing nor Jurisdiction is easily obtained except on the general principle of being in conformity to “Constitutional” needs that is not defined for “legal” purposes.

    So it necessarily becomes a test of wills against those who support a contrary agenda and those who wish to adhere self-evident and prudent needs of the provision of the Clause.

    The “insurgency” has prepared for the assault against their usurpation which makes it necessary to continuously and consistently attack the defenses they have erected seeking the weak points.

    The most obvious chink in their amour is COMMON SENSE, and like Thomas Payne, we know the best way to inform the public on the Common Sense of our cause is to continuously and consistently proclaim it in any and all forums and venues available.

  3. 02/7/2012bob says:

    Judge Malihi decided to use dicta from a previous case in Indiana (Ankeny) as the main deciding factor of presidential natural born citizenship, even though a footnote in Judge Malihi’s decision disclaims that the Ankeny ruling didn’t actually define natural born citizenship

    Malihi did not use dicta from Ankeny: Ankeny held those plaintiffs failed to state a cause of action because there is no two-citizen-parent (or even one-citizen-parent) rule.

    This has forced even the opposition to such questioning to continuously move the proverbial goalposts insofar as managing expectations has been concerned.

    What are you talking about? “The opposition” has consistently said none of these ballot challenges will succeed.

    On the other hand, we still do not have a definitive determination of exactly who qualifies as a natural born citizen with respect to presidential eligibility.

    Can’t you read?: “Thanks” to Judge Malihi, we know that people born in the United States are natural-born citizens and thus eligible. President Obama is eligible.

    While I fully admit to appreciating the copious amounts of energy spent on pushing forward in these cases, after having essentially failed at a handful of them, what evidence was there that n+1 cases were going to succeed?

    Which is what “the opposition” has been saying since, oh, Ankeny.

    For one thing, the Ankeny v. Daniels case would never have occurred. What, then, would Judge Malihi have used as a reference point in his own decision?

    ALJ Malihi would have done what the Ankeny court did: Surveyed the legal arguments, and come to conclusion that the professors and other experts have already said: birth in the United States is sufficient for natural-born citizenship.

    Removing all emotion from the issue, should any other nationwide, State-based ballot challenge go forward, would it not be true that said challenge would simply use Judge Malihi’s decision in the same way that Judge Malihi used the Ankeny dicta, thereby maintain the current inertia of the issue?

    Which is what “the opposition” has been saying since, oh, Ankeny: birth in the United States is sufficient for natural-born citizenship, and that isn’t going to change.

    Maybe expending so much energy towards the same process and expecting different results every time doesn’t mean there’s an issue with the Judiciary; it could just mean that you’ve got a bad strategy, and beating your head against the same proverbial brick wall will only open up more wounds.

    Exhibit A: This blog.
    * * *
    What lies?
    President Obama was born in Hawaii, and there is no competent contrary evidence. It is a lie to suggest otherwise.

    IN MY OPINION, Obama is not a NBC because his father was not a US Citizen at the time he was born….how is that a lie?

    You are, of course, entitled to your opinion, but no basis for your opinion can be found American jurisprudence. It is a lie to suggest otherwise.

    Frankly, I think it would benefit both sides to call for a hearing on the real merits.

    That just happened; birthers lost.

    ahhh, just image the sweet victory he could savor…..

    Friday’s birther tears were indeed sweet; thanks.

  4. 02/7/2012slcraig says:

    bob;

    Birthers have not lost nor will they relent.

    All that has happened is that Malihi has exposed the corruption, once again, that exists in the Guvmnt institutions that disregard the Rule of Law, the dictates of the common law system of Staria deices precedent and the National Security interests of American Sovereignty.

    Of course the agenda you appear to adhere to does not allow you to confess it, but the Constitutions perpetuation is not part of that agenda, but rather its remaking by any means necessary.

    The natural law that informed its construction has long since denied the benefits of collectivism, yet the hero Marx resurrects a political structure that denies the nature of laws that benefit societies in favor of feel good dictates that relieve the collective of the labors of thought and reason producing the results we have before us, ignorance and chaos under the color of authority.

    So, no, the Birthers did not and have not lost. Truth stands immutable against the flames ignited to destroy it, and those flames serve to shine a light of reason upon the common sense provisions of the natural law principles the Constitution embodies.

    The GA. ALJ did little more than to give cause to the rational among us another cause to acknowledge the corruption that has infested our Republic and the Truth of it is the Domestic enemies greatest fear.

  5. 02/7/2012bob says:

    So the armchair pseudolawyers know the law better than the judges. Gotcha.

  6. 02/7/2012Phil says:

    Aren’t we all (including you) armchair pseudolawyers?

    Assuming you’re not a lawyer, you’ve helped me corner the market on ironic statements (at least when you think I’m making them)!

  7. 02/7/2012California Constitutionalist says:

    Hey, Bob, humor us on this scenario, will you? How do you feel about natural born citizenship being bestowed on a child born here of Sharia Law proponents who are in this nation illegally and have every intention of indoctrinating their child with the aim of having him become president so they could fundamentally transform this nation into an Islamic state?

    Stay tuned for March 1 when Sheriff Joe’s posse will unveil the potentially damning evidence about Obama. If it turns out that he indeed wasn’t born in Hawaii but in Kenya, what would your response be? http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2012/02/sheriff-joe-arpaios-cold-case-posse-set.html

    And what will it be should it turn out that Judge Malihi screwed up big time? Would disbarment be out of the question? http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2012/02/attorney-hatfields-response-to-ga.html

  8. 02/7/2012bob says:

    Aren’t we all (including you) armchair pseudolawyers?
    The Fogbow, for example, is full of lawyers. And the people at the Fogbow have correctly predicted the outcome of every. single. case.
    Unlike kismetique, for example, I don’t equate my opinion with the actual state of the law. Rather, I look to what real lawyers — judges, professors, and other experts — have all said: birth in the United States is sufficient for natural-born citizenship.

  9. 02/7/2012bob says:

    How do you feel about natural born citizenship being bestowed on a child born here of Sharia Law proponents who are in this nation illegally and have every intention of indoctrinating their child with the aim of having him become president so they could fundamentally transform this nation into an Islamic state?
    1. There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution to prevent it.
    2. It will never happen, and such a person will never be elected, so I don’t lose any sleep over it.
    Stay tuned for March 1 when Sheriff Joe’s posse will unveil the potentially damning evidence about Obama.
    The familiar sound of goalpost moving. “Any day now.”
    If it turns out that he indeed wasn’t born in Hawaii but in Kenya, what would your response be?
    As there’s no competent evidence to suggest President Obama was born anywhere other than Hawaii, I don’t worry about such things.
    And what will it be should it turn out that Judge Malihi screwed up big time? Would disbarment be out of the question?
    Judges generally are not disbarred for making a decision that later gets reversed. But ALJ Malihi ruled correctly on the law and facts; so, again, it is something I don’t worry about.

  10. 02/7/2012Phil says:

    bob,

    [on sarcasm — because, to some, this might not be so obvious :) ]

    I’m so proud of you, bob, for being nothing more than an unthinking, dependent-minded mouthpiece for yet another forum on the Internet, comprised of people you might not have ever even seen in real life before!

    (Of course, this isn’t news to me, but it might be for other readers)

    [off sarcasm]

    Heh. Every time I see one of your comments show up in my email, I immediately have the onomatopoetic expression fire off in my head: “Nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah, boo, boo… [insert copy-and-pasted text from other forum(s) here]… so, you just take THAT!”

  11. 02/7/2012Phil says:

    Bob! Stop essentially cross-posting from other forums! Use actual links instead!

    An unused mind is a terrible blight of ignorance on the face of humanity. Quit wallowing in intellectual bankruptcy. Take a chance on being wrong — or right. Use your own mind.

  12. 02/7/2012bob says:

    I’m so proud of you, bob, for being nothing more than an unthinking, dependent-minded mouthpiece for yet another forum on the Internet, comprised of people you might not have ever even seen in real life before!
    Unlike birthers, of course. (“Read Donofrio’s latest! Apuzzo nailed it!” O RLY?)
    And, no, I don’t depend on what the people at Fogbow say; I rely on what the actual experts say. The folks at Fogbow, however, have correctly identified the controlling law; they have a reputation for being right. Unlike birthers.
    Every time I see one of your comments show up in my email, I immediately have the onomatopoetic expression fire off in my head: “Nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah, boo, boo… [insert copy-and-pasted from other forum lines here]… so, you just take THAT!
    Good to know you respond to reality with childish taunts. How’s that working for you?

  13. 02/7/2012bob says:

    Stop essentially cross-posting from other forums!
    I’m not cross-posting from other fora.
    Use actual links instead!
    Your spam filter is overly sensitive to links. (And doesn’t allow for paragraph breaks, it would also seem.)
    Use your own mind.
    Oh, the irony.

  14. 02/7/2012Phil says:

    Dude! You possess a brain! Wake up!

    Clearly, you missed the sarcasm tags (I knew that’d probably trip you up, because you’re not using your own brain yet).

    Also, I was referencing what I hear you say, not what I’m saying back to you.

    However, if “use your brain” is interpreted by you as “childish taunts,” well then, it might be even harder for you to unplug from the Matrix…

  15. 02/7/2012Phil says:

    OK, OK, I’ll admit it.

    bob is an Obama-bot. An Obam-aton.

    I hate it, but it’s true. There’s a brain in that there bob, but it ain’t being used, yet…

  16. 02/7/2012bob says:

    Clearly, you missed the sarcasm tags
    Clearly, you suck at humor. But it is funny when you say that I lack a brain because I have reviewed the facts and the law, and have separated the valid claims from the invalid.
    But if you need to continue venting how you wasted years of your life on a stupid argument, please continue; it’ll make you feel better.

  17. 02/7/2012bob says:

    And while you were throwing your hissy fit: Kemp accepts Malihi’s recommendation: http://www.scribd.com/doc/80807217/2012-02-07-Final-Decision-of-GA-Secretary-of-State-Kemp
    Look! A link! From a member of Fogbow!

  18. 02/7/2012California Constitutionalist says:

    Thank you for letting us know, Bob. Now this intellectually dishonest and blatantly flawed decision to can be appealed, all the way to SCOTUS if necessary.

    As much as we’d like to believe that Obama is a natural-born citizen, or even a basic citizen for God’s sake, I’m afraid to say that he and his Kool Aid-drinking Obots have utterly and miserably failed to meet the sniff test when it comes to his creds. You all do have something to hide, and we’re going to find out what that is soon.

  19. 02/7/2012bob says:

    Now this intellectually dishonest and blatantly flawed decision to can be appealed, all the way to SCOTUS if necessary.
    SCOTUS will never hear this case.
    I’m afraid to say that he and his Kool Aid-drinking Obots have utterly and miserably failed to meet the sniff test when it comes to his creds
    AGAIN: All competent evidence demonstrates President Obama was born in Hawaii, and birth in the United States is sufficient for natural-born citizenship. Your hopes notwithstanding.

  20. 02/7/2012Phil says:

    Clearly, it is clear that you have clearly missed the entire, clear point of my maintaining this, clearly, my personal blog.

    Clearly.

  21. 02/7/2012Phil says:

    Well that’s a freakin’ start.

  22. 02/7/2012Phil says:

    Clearly.

    Heh.

    :P

  23. 02/7/2012sharon2 says:

    “But if you need to continue venting how you wasted years of your life on a stupid argument, please continue; it’ll make you feel better.” (comment by bob, who attempts to correct Phil’s Latin grammar by changing forum to fora* when if he really studied Latin, would know that Phil used forums as the object of the preposition, which uses the genitive case, not the nominative case as bob did thus making bob incorrect)

    Phil,

    Bob obviously missed the irony again when he accuses you of wasting your life venting when he has spent a great deal of time venting about you venting, as he throws a hissy fit while accusing you of a hissy fit.

    *I’m not cross-posting from other fora- bob

  24. 02/7/2012bob says:

    And in other news: President Obama remains the president, President Obama remains on the ballot in Georgia (and New Hampshire, and Alabama), and birthers have yet to win a case.

  25. 02/7/2012bob says:

    And the genitive plural of forum is fororum. Feel free to correct Phil at any time.

  26. 02/8/2012California Constitutionalist says:

    Bob, I take it that you WOULD feel pretty stupid and naive if conclusive evidence came out that Obama was actually born in Kenya. Or in Elmhurst, N.Y., as the illegitimate son of Malcolm X who was then shipped off to Indonesia to be cared for by President Sukarno and then adopted by Lolo Soetoro and Stanley Ann Dunham.

  27. 02/8/2012brygenon says:

    Phil asks: “should any other nationwide, State-based ballot challenge go forward, would it not be true that said challenge would simply use Judge Malihi’s decision in the same way that Judge Malihi used the Ankeny dicta, thereby maintain the current inertia of the issue?”

    If they go forward in the same way, to the judge rendering an opinion on the Donofrio theory, then probably yes. Any judge reaching it would find the same cases and literature. That said, it took a particular combination of law and lawyering to get here, and most judges in future eligibility cases are more likely to do what most judges in past cases have done.

    There’s no possibility that Obama could be eligible to be President of the United States in one state but not another, nor eligible for his first term but not a second. The challenges are less about the ballot that about attacking the legitimacy of Obama’s presidency. Judges are likely to resist letting their courts be used that way.

  28. 02/8/2012bob says:

    I take it that you WOULD feel pretty stupid and naive if conclusive evidence came out that Obama was actually born in Kenya. Or in Elmhurst, N.Y., as the illegitimate son of Malcolm X who was then shipped off to Indonesia to be cared for by President Sukarno and then adopted by Lolo Soetoro and Stanley Ann Dunham.
    Key word being IF. There’s no actual evidence to support either of those lies.

  29. 02/8/2012California Constitutionalist says:

    Bob, I’ll check back with you on March 1 on the “if” question faster than you can say Bari Malik Shabazz after Sheriff Joe finishes revealing the findings of the Cold Case Posse.

  30. 02/9/2012bob says:

    I’ll check back with you on March 1 on the “if” question faster than you can say Bari Malik Shabazz after Sheriff Joe finishes revealing the findings of the Cold Case Posse.
    “Any day now.”
    Nothing of consequence will come out of the March 1 “announcement.”
    In the meantime, President Obama continues to be the president, and President Obama continues to remain on the primary and caucus ballots. (Fun fact: President Obama already has 460 delegate votes!)

  31. 03/2/2012bob says:

    Judge Wright dismisses the petitions; Jablonski was right all along.

    http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Crazy-order-on-all-GA-cases.pdf

  32. 03/9/2012bob says:

    Phil was correct: Another judge had no problem applying Ankeny and concluding that President Obama is a natural-born citizen. The judge expressly dismissed the birther argument about Minor.
    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/293080/birthers-lose-again-kevin-d-williamson