Well, I asked an attorney that same question. He said that to do so would set a precedent of having the POTUS release private documentation. Obama should have released the long form prior to Berg’s original lawsuit when he knew there was doubt. He didn’t and then he was sued. He has to provide a defense or be subjected to a default judgment against him. He’s not misusing DOJ attorneys. It’s their obligation under the law to provide a defense for the POTUS.
Although this may not be an equivalent analogy, think of it this way ...
A homeschool parent in Texas is accused of not holding school the required number of days per school year and not teaching the required material on citizenship. So the State of Texas sues that parent to prove that she held school the required length of time and taught citizenship class. The homeschool parent has attendance records to show the exact number of days she held class and she has her child’s homework and graded tests to demonstrate the material taught in citizenship class. Being an honorable and trustworthy person, she wants to produce the records to clear her name and put an end to the lawsuit.
However, the Texas Homeschool Coalition who defends parents in all lawsuits related to homeschool violations advises her that there is no law requiring her to produce any documentation. The only legal requirement in Texas is that the homeschool parent agrees to abide by the requirements. The THSC advises her that to release the documentation would set a precedent that might force other parents to keep and produce records that are not required by law. The THSC and parent fight the lawsuit on principle.
Now, that analogy is in no way intended to imply that Obama is honorable or has the necessary documentation. It’s meant only to show that sometimes defending oneself in a lawsuit is contrary to what seems straightforward.
Flame away!
Bwaahahaha! Isn't it a bit too early in the day to be consuming so much koolaide?
I agree with your point that he should have presented the documentation before it ever came to a lawsuit.
But his representation should have known that in Quo Warranto he could be required to show the documentation anyway so it would save a lot of trouble just to do it right away anyway.
And (though I know this wasn’t in your point at all; you made your point well) if the homeschooler presented fake documents and posted them online and had people make public statements about it, it would be more analogous.
My secretary of state told me that there is no legal requirement for the documents to be produced because the people have the power to vet the candidates. If Obama had merely made the argument that he doesn’t legally have to produce the documents the public would have possibly said, “Then screw you.” What he did was say he didn’t have to produce the legal documents but then produced illegal ones. And Americans swallowed it.
A rational American will say, "So?...This president should spend the $15 to produce his birth certificate, and if other presidents are asked for their birth certificates and other documentation, they should TOO!"
Is a "duh!" necessary?
Americans will (and are concluding) that it is IRRATIONAL to use DOJ attorneys to prevent the release of documents that common Americans release every day for all sorts of reasons. It is not only irrational it is keeping these attorneys from the important work of defending our nation against enemies that would bomb planes out of the sky,and shoot our soldiers on their bases and recruitment centers.
To suggest that Obama is not releasing this **common** documentation because he doesn't want to "inconvenience" future presidents is more than laughable. It is UNBELIEVABLE! This is why nearly 50% of Americans doubt Obama's eligibility. His behavior is UNBELIEVABLE!!!
The DOJ will need to come up with a better talking point that that.