Malihi didn’t need probative evidence because his decision was based entirely on “judge’s knowledge”.
Obama is dependent on a sharia ruling in order to even be on the GA ballot.
There is a pattern emerging recently that confirms reports from earlier. I posted about it at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2843995/posts?page=88#88 .
One of us is missing the point. Malihi's ruling has the weight of a legal ruling in a court of law and, as such, has established a new legal precedent. We can go back and forth about sharia law and other such topics (which I consider to be strawman arguments), but they have no impact on this ruling.
Even though Malihi is considered an administrative law judge, he is still a member of the judiciary and his rulings have the same effect as that of any other court.
IOW, this isn't about Obama, this is about the obliteration of our judicial system by a judge who ruled in favor of a defendant who neither presented a defense nor bothered to appear as instructed by the court.