Supreme Court Silent on Obama Birth Certificate Lawsuit

The Supreme Court made no announcement today whether or not it will hear Donofrio v. Wells, the lawsuit challenging the election based on Barack Obama's release - or alleged lack thereof - of his official birth certificate and his citizenship status. (The court did decide to hear two cases, one of which is the case of Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri, an Al Qaeda combatant seized on American soil.) Of course, there's no guarantee the Court will ever actually issue any statement on the Obama case since it was simply petitioned to the court and, along with hundreds of other cases, could be dismissed without any comment at all. But as Frank James, over at The Swamp, says, "the lack of an announcement doesn't mean the court definitely won't hear Donofrio." So either we will or we won't. Hmm.

Meanwhile, our comrades at our sister site DCist scoped out a protest held by supporters of the Donofrio cause at the Supreme Court this morning led by Roger Bredow, who claims Obama has duel citizenship.

The Supreme Court will announce whether it will actually consider the Obama lawsuit as early as today and as late as Monday. If (as expected) the Court tosses the suit, Bredow will start challenging Obama's legitimacy based on "foreign money that went into his campaign." Other protestors said they'd start contacting members of the Electoral College. Steve Brindle, who drove down from Pennsylvania, said he'd called his senators yesterday.
"There aren't a lot of people out here today," said Brindle. "There are a lot of people talking about this back home. Really, everyone's asking questions."

Of course, only 15 to 20 people showed so...yeah.

Either way, nothing will ever outweigh the rage we felt this morning when we read that Obama has allegedly chosen a Zune over an iPod. We're whipping up a petition as we speak and expect a protest very, very soon.

Photo by Dave Weigel courtesy of our pals at DCist

Exactly! I have looked into changing my last name back to my birth name and guess what I have to do accomplish that? I have to get my original long form BC! I have to submit to a background check and clear up any problems attached to my new identity and I could go on. There is a real legal procedure that takes place and alot of paperwork to do it.

Oh and when you become the new you the State and County notify everyone of your new identity, even the FBI. So your personage and any identifiables carry to the new you. Think National Database of Fingerprints, IRS, SS, FICA and on.

It cost some money and they don’t take personal checks. Certified check or Money Order in those days.

Once, the State says your a new person with a new name your old alias is still held as record should you ever use it again.

Then you have to tell everyone about the new you! Credit Card Company, Utilities, DMV, Passport(hmmm), Insurance Auto and Life. Especially Life - how could pay a beneficiary if you are not legally who you said you were?

Any way it goes on and on. Not that simple and plenty of records especially if you performed the act of adoption or name change from two jurisdictions(two different states or two different countries)

If you did between countries the information is located in the city, county, state, and national files.

Voila! surely there is someone who honest enough to be dishonest and expose this chump.

Regarding SCOTUS being silent, I just had a thought. Maybe it is better if they pass on this than rule against us. Here is the reasoning. Let’s say they rule against us. Imagine someone like Breyer writing the ruling. He could make a statement affirming that they consider Obama a natural born citizen under then Constitution and law. Then, every other court could use this as precedent to throw out future challenges. The problem with Leo’s case is it starts with the assumption that Obama was born in Hawaii, SCOTUS could acknowledge this and endanger further cases.

Sometimes silence is better..

(I know the following post is more fitted for the Religion forum, but it’s meant as an answer to your post)

If He answers “No”, it could be because He’s setting up the End Times for His people.

My pastor has said a few times that he can’t find America mentioned or even alluded to anywhere in the Scriptures. It could be (and this is pure speculation) that America is destroyed or so weakened/marginalized that we don’t figure anywhere in the End Times. And...it could be the Zero is the one God has set aside to accomplish this.

The attorney who filed the Donofrio case has steadfastly avoided the BC issue and forthrightly states he believes Obama was born in Hawaii.

I agree with you that the BC issue is complicating discussion of the potential actual legal arguments. So stop talking about it!

BTW, I can guarantee you that perusing the “caselaw” for a few minutes is not going to give you an accurate answer as to how one’s father’s citizenship, especially under the facts at hand, impacts one’s status as a natural born citizen.

You seem to be suggesting that we should assume that Obama is a natural born citizen until proven otherwise. That is the wrong way to approach the issue. Since the Consitituion REQUIRES that the President be a natural born citizen, potential Presidents must prove their eligibility (notwithstanding the apparent lack of a a specific mechanism to do so).

Given that Obama has refused to provide a long form birth certificate that demonstrates where he was born and given the fact that supposedly his paternal grandmother says he was born in Kenya, in my view the appropriate course of action for the SCOTUS is to simultaneously create a formal process under which presidnetial candidates prove their eligibility and immediately require that Obama comply with that process.

By your suggested standard, virtually anyone who does not have a foreign birth certificate floating around in the public domain could run for the U.S. Presidency, which of course is ridiculous

He has a birth certificate, AND the state of Hawaii has said repeatedly its real.

Real, but from what country? Hawaii did some interesting things.

Additionally, that doesnt matter because Obama is a citizen even if he was born outside the country, because his mother was a citizen.

Not true. Apparently you haven't been following this for long.

There is one fact here that cannot be denied. Obama has refused to produce the correct document. PERIOD.

It is easy to do, it doesn’t cost but a little, so there is no excuse for failing to do so UNLESS there is something to hide. What he has to hide may not be where he was born, maybe it is something else. Maybe where it says father it says unknown, or....who knows, but it is obvious that it tells a story he doesn’t want known and as our President we have a right to know that story. PERIOD. This guy is making a laughing stock of this country over this thing.

Both of McCain’s parents were Americans. And, believe it or not, it is not actually settled at law that he was eligible to serve as President either. Had he won the election, this EXACT same challenged would have been made against him by the Left.

Which proves the point that the SCOTUS should bring some clarity to this area of the law, at the minimum by saying the Congress should.

As for Obama’s citizenship by descent, remember he had to have been a natural born citizen under the laws in effect at the time of his birth, which some argue made it necessary for him to attain citizenship by descent from his father-—which was impossible in this case.

Plus, we have never had a president whose parents were not Americans at the time of his birth. That may or may not make a difference. But that is the point: it may or may not, we don’t know, and this is the President and the Constiution we’re talking about here.

You said — “Additionally, that doesnt matter because Obama is a citizen even if he was born outside the country, because his mother was a citizen. McCain was born in panama, and he is a natural born citizen.”

Not necessarily... According to what I was reading — because of his mother’s age and the guy she married being from Kenya, Obama would not qualify to be a citizen. The mother wasn’t old enough, you see, even with her being a citizen. She had to have been in the U.S. a certain number of years by a certain age or Obama would not qualify. That’s the problem, you see...

Now, with McCain, it was with two American citizen parents and he was born in an area that the court determined qualified him to be “natural born”. That was taken to a court and a court made that determination. Besides, McCain gave over his birth certificate right away — no problems. Obama still refuses to do so.

In regards to the State of Hawaii, they don’t say where Obama was born, only that they have the document there. You look at the words very carefully and they avoid saying where Obama was born *even though* they know that this is the *main issue*... They don’t want to say and be the ones who get sued for releasing that information if Obama hasn’t.

So, it’s all a matter of Obama doing *everything he can* to hide his birth certificate and the information on it. There’s a serious problem there, otherwise, he wouldn’t have a problem in releasing it.

Your analysis still doesn’t answer the question of what constituted “natural born” at the time of the signing-—specifically, whether it required citizenship descend from the *father.*

If that was the case, and it may have been, and that had not been changed in some constitutionally competent way by 1961, we got ourselves a ball game.

All I’m saying is I sure do love to sit around and jawbone about the law and what you or I think it means and what the cases say and how this statute and that statute applies or doesn’t. But so what? All we’re proving is that no one really knows because the Supreme Court has never addressed the issue-—even to address it by saying the Congress must establish a standard that is not vague, that has procedures for enforcement (vetting), for challenge and appeal, and a remedy.

You are bringing up Jay’s letter to Washington. Hells bells! Doesn’t that tell you something? Don’t you think lawyers out to be able to point to something, chapter and verse, as to under what circumstances a person is and is not eligible to be President of the United States and Commander in Chief?

It may not be the SCOTUS’ baliwick to figure out that standard in the first instance, but it is the SCOTUS’ responsibility to ensure that the law of the land comports with the Constitution and this may be a case in which they can do that.

You said — “Or maybe her family just wanted it out there that Ann had actually married Barack I and that Barack II was not illegitimate.”

So, you’re saying that she just went over to Kenya for “show” and didn’t get married? Is that it? I don’t know.

But, I do know that the grandmother of Obama says that she was there when he was born in Kenya...

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

December 5, 2008

Supreme Court Silent on Obama Birth Certificate Lawsuit