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.
Both points are valid. Malihi just used a sharia standard of evidence (none needed) to give Obama a favorable ruling, which is also bad precedent.
If people realize that it is a ruling allowed by sharia rather than by US judicial standards, it will help people realize where all this is coming from and where it is headed.
Those who have no problem with this legal evidentiary standard are supporting the same kinds of things that sharia has allowed all over the world. This isn’t just some tee-hee stupid “birther” issue. This is about whether we LITERALLY allow judges to make up their own “facts”.
I’ve said elsewhere that in order to bring attention to the ridiculousness of this precedent, Georgians should post birth certificates, driver’s licenses, medical licenses, etc online under the names of Mickey Mouse, Daisy Duck, etc and then show those images on their laptops whenever anybody asks for documentation. If any GA state entity refuses to accept the laptop image the person - under the name they are claiming - should sue GA for violating the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment - for allowing Obama to use a computer image of an alleged vital record but not allowing Daisy Duck to do the same.
So I am not disagreeing with what you’ve said about it being a terrible precedent. I think Malihi should be made to lie in the bed he’s made, so it can be soundly scoffed and nullified.
I’m just expanding on it to say that the evidentiary standard Malihi used is the same one used to stone women to death and steal property from Coptic Christians in Egypt (etc ad nauseum) without any evidence other than “judge’s knowledge”. And if we allow it here - even if in a case that people want to mock, call racist, or whatever - it plants an acorn that WILL grow into that full-blown tree.