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

I have every confidence that the Supreme Court will act appropriately. But the case in front of them has to meet certain standards; if it does, they will grant cert. If it doesn’t, they might remand or take other action. They may even outline their reasoning (which is what I’m hoping for).

I don’t believe for a minute that they will shy away from any case that they know really must be heard and possibly decided by the SCOTUS. Right now, it’s just a question of how they evaluate the case and what their initial read on the legal and factual issues is.

If this case is denied and somehow Obamafraud is actually sworn in I hope that ALL defense attorneys in this country are lined up filing suits on behave of their clients. Saying all laws of the US are now null and void since the POTUS is a usurper. Let’s have a free-for-all.

I hope some court somewhere in the US will actually subpoena his birth certificate. There must be some court/judge that actually takes his oath to uphold the constitution seriously.

If this case is denied and somehow Obamafraud is actually sworn in I hope that ALL defense attorneys in this country are lined up filing suits on behalf of their clients saying all laws of the US are now null and void since the POTUS is a usurper. Let’s have a free-for-all.

I hope some court somewhere in the US will actually subpoena his birth certificate. There must be some court/judge that actually takes his oath to uphold the constitution seriously.

Also, I realize that Leo’s case is not about the birth certificate but rather natural born status.

Weicker’s parents = both Americans.

Romney’s parents = both Americans.

Goldwater’s parents = both Americans.

Arthur’s parents = both Americans (although Arthur’s father was born in Ireland and there is a dispute as to whether he actually was a naturalized American at the time of Chester’s birth).

Obama’s parents = one American and one British subject. Later one Indonesian adoptive father.

You seem to be keeping up with this issue. Do you know if it is true that Obama said on his website that he was a “citizen under the 14th Amendment”?

............

from obama's own site factcheck.org by way of fightthesmears on his dual citizenship at birth

“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.

Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982.”

from obama's own site factcheck.org by way of fightthesmears on his dual citizenship at birth

“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.

Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982.”

Wouldn’t the court setting some extra-constitutional standard be an example of that judicial activism we’re always hearing about? There’s not a word in the constitution regarding how one proves eligibility, or what “natural born” might mean, and there’s certainly no serious evidence behind claims Obama wasn’t born in Hawaii.

I mean, except for the obvious step his mother took of putting a birth announcement in a Hawaii newspaper, just in case he ever wanted to run for President someday despite being, you know, born in Kenya.

Having gotten more interested in the legal issues lately, I’ve been doing some nosing around. Sure, I’d heard that the Left had been up in arms about McCain “not being a natural born citizen,” and thus “ineligible” to serve as President, but I really didn’t know until recently the depth and breadth of that discussion.

Believe me, had McCain won, the Left would have been this exact same challenge to him, and be mouthing the same conspiracy theories as well.

The only difference is that most on our side will accept that the Supreme Court’s action (or non-action) as legitimate, while their side never would.

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