DOJ to judge: dump birthers' suit

Politico ^ | 09/07/2009 | Josh Gerstein

[Free America52]

The Justice Department is urging a federal court to toss out a lawsuit in which prominent birthers' attorney Orly Taitz is challenging President Barack Obama's Constitutional qualifications to be president.

In a motion filed Friday in U.S. District Court in Santa Ana, Calif., government lawyers did not directly rebut the conspiracy theory Taitz propounds that Obama was not born in Hawaii as he claims and as asserted by Hawaiian officials as well as contemporary newspaper birth notices. Instead, the federal attorneys argued that the suit is inherently flawed because such disputes can't be resolved in court and because the dozens of plaintiffs can't show they are directly injured by Obama's presence in office.

"It is clear, from the text of the Constitution, and the relevant statutory law implementing the Constitution’s textual commitments, that challenges to the qualifications of a candidate for President can, in the first instance, be presented to the voting public before the election, and, once the election is over, can be raised as objections as the electoral votes are counted in the Congress," Assistant United States Attorneys Roger West and David DeJute wrote. "Therefore, challenges such as those purportedly raised in this case are committed, under the Constitution, to the electors, and to the Legislative branch."

The birthers' suit claims that Obama is a citizen of Indonesia and "possibly still citizen of Kenya, usurping the position of the President of the United States of America and the Commander-in-Chief.”

Lieutenant Jason Freese and some other plaintiffs in the case claim they have a real injury because they are serving in the military commander by Obama, the alleged usurper. However, West and DeJute say that argument is too speculative.

"The injuries alleged by Plaintiff Freese and the other military Plaintiffs herein, are not particularized as to them, but, rather, would be shared by all members of the military and is an inadequate basis on which to establish standing," the government lawyers wrote.

Another plaintiff in the suit, Alan Keyes, is a three-time, longshot presidential candidate who ran most recently in 2008. Yet another is Gail Lightfoot, an ultra-longshot vice presidential candidate in 2008. The DOJ argues that they were not directly aggrieved by Obama's election because they never had a mathematical chance of winning.

"The [lawsuit] does not allege, nor could it allege, that any of these Plaintiffs were even on the ballot in enough states in the year 2008 to gain the requisite 270 electoral votes to win the Presidential election," the motion states.

The Justice Department brief takes a few shots at the wackiness of the birthers, accusing them of trafficking in "innuendo" and advancing "a variety of vaguely-defined claims purportedly related to a hodgepodge of constitutional provisions, civil and criminal statutes, and the Freedom of Information Act."

Those arguments notwithstanding, the DOJ lawyers were pretty kind to the birthers and to Taitz, since the filings in the case are replete with spelling errors, among others. Taitz submitted another purported foreign birth certificate for Obama last week in a filing labeled, "Kenian Hospital Birth Certificate for Barack Obama."

The case is set for a hearing Tuesday morning before Judge David Carter. There's a strong chance the session will devolve into something of a sideshow since a couple of plaintiffs in the case are now in a dispute with Taitz and have sought to bring in a different attorney to represent them in the case.

[Lmo56]

I never said that standing was a law. Technically it is a doctrine.

***

And a doctrine has no force or effect of law ...

[STARWISE]

Bbq’ing today.

The reason for the picture is to show
Judge David O. Carter. Please pray for him
for tomorrow.

Here’s info that I found when I saw mention
of the 106th Congress. So I’ve been searching
for bills for that Congress and found this.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c106:H.R.10.PCS:

It doesn’t seem to relate, and there’s no section J, Item 12.

But searching again, I find this ... and it’s reserved for Pelosi ..

http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d111:1:./temp/~bdYl7P:@@@K|/bss/111search.html|

and that references H.Res. 6 .. which is this:

H.RES.6

Title: Recognizing the significant contribution coaches make in the life of children who participate in organized sports and supporting the goals and ideals of National Coaches Appreciation Week.

http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:HE00006:|/bss/111search.html|
Sponsor: Rep McIntyre, Mike [NC-7] (introduced 1/6/2009) Cosponsors (29)
Related Bills: H.R.10
Latest Major Action: 3/6/2009 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Healthy Families and Communities.

~~~~~~~~

Makes NO sense .. yet the Motion to Dismiss from DOJ references H.R.10 (j)(12)

OOOOps .. okay .. here we go .. went back to the Motion and found their reference in the text on pg. 13:

“The Constitution’s textual commitment of this responsibility is a responsibility that Congress has embraced. Both the House and Senate have standing committees with jurisdiction to decide questions relating to Presidential elections.

See S.R. 25.1n(1)(5) (the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration has jurisdiction over “proposed legislation, messages, petitions, memorials, and other matters relating to . . . federal elections generally, including the election of the President, Vice President, and members of Congress, as well as “Presidential succession”)

(copy attached for Court’s convenience as Exhibit 1 hereto). See also H.R. 10(j)(12). (Copy attached as Exhibit 2).

http://www.politico.com/static/PPM124_birthersdismissbrf.html

[Lmo56]

But the State of Hawaii did certify it to be a true copy of the original COLB.

Misleading. The State of Hawaii has never confirmed the Obama COLB for authenticity that DailyKos or “Factcheck”.org have posted online if the document was ever issued by the state, in fact they have refused to.

***

I think what was actually said was that, according to the data currently maintained on file in Hawaii, they have determined that he was born there.

Just what that data is - well, wouldn’t we like to know ...

[penelopesire]

“Fraud is an impeachable offense. Now go prove it.’

So is subversion of the constitution!

“....Impeachment is designed “to protect our country and our Constitution from leadership that has become a danger to the country. Phrases used by the framers of the Constitution include ‘corruption,’ ‘abuse of power,’ ‘subversion of the Constitution,’ and ‘neglect of duty.’”

From the ABA:

http://www.abanet.org/publiced/impeach2.html

[Bellflower]

Why is the DOJ weighing in on this so called “non issue”?

Daah....I wonder./sar

[Tennessee Nana]

RS did you know that I, born a British citizen, have both a short form and a long form...

I have a child born in Oregon in 1974 who has both a short form and a long form..

I also have a child born in South Carolina in 1979 who has both a short form and a long form..

Both short forms are called Certification of Live Birth

and both long forms are called Certificate of Live Birth

Both received the footy print dochment from the hospital...

BUT...

Only the long form was accepted when they started kindergarten or joined anthing else...

Ya think that a peek at a long form would be a requirement to be President of the United States...wouldnt ya ???

[hoosiermama]

They said they had material on file....no comment as to where he was born. Since it is possible that he could have been born elsewhere and still be registered in HI, it only lends itself to more speculation.

[BuckeyeTexan]

I read your posts. They’re illogical. You’re running around in circles.

Neither Clinton nor Biden were leaders of the DNC. They were presidential candidates just like Obama. You can’t sue somebody because they should have known something. You have to prove that their actions directly caused you injury and that that injury is unique to you.

Again, you didn’t answer my question. What actions did Clinton, Gates, and Biden take as private citizens that would result in injury to the plaintiffs? If you can list specific actions, then I’d agree that they are not entitled to DOJ attorneys. Otherwise, they’re listed as officers of the executive branch and by default are entitled to DOJ attorneys.

[STARWISE]

Thank you for your clarity.
Please let us know if these
actions breed any response.

[Red Steel]

Ya think that a peek at a long form would be a requirement to be President of the United States...wouldnt ya ???

Yes, it's too bad the Obama defenders will twist themselves into pretzels to keep it hidden.

[STARWISE]

Thanks. It’s some encouragement to hear
there are those in govt who grasp the travesty.

[reasonisfaith]

“This is his — or her — job.”

Not to get off topic, but I am sort of curious—what kind of identification did you have to present when you got the job, NS?

It would be interesting to find out whether they made you produce your birth certificate.

[BuckeyeTexan]

No that would be you doing that not me. You didn’t bring it up with me. I pointed it out to you. Go back and read our exchanges. I haven’t answered wrongly. You just don’t like the answers. You won’t answer my questions. When you do, I’ll be happy to converse with you.

[STARWISE]

Now that I think of it, did this maybe have something
to do with the hearing with Judge Carter, with Taitz having
to provide service to opposing counsel and she hadn’t
and Carter referred her to do it via the US Atty’s office
there .. and it was decided that they could accept service?
Is that why they could be repping BHO now ?

[Red Steel]

I think what was actually said was that, according to the data currently maintained on file in Hawaii, they have determined that he was born there.

Just what that data is - well, wouldn’t we like to know ...

Yes. Although many suspect because Hawaii allowed only a statement from a witness of a Hawaiian birth, the veracity of the birth location could be in question. I would want to see the supporting document(s) if this is the case.

[hoosiermama]

When I got dad ready for bed we discussed that very issue...”since Carter served the US attorneys, did that trigger the DOJ to respond?
Remember that they also sputtered some excuses for BO and were unprepared to defend him but attempted any way.

[BuckeyeTexan]

If a judge dismisses a case for lack of standing, he has ruled that the plaintiff has no legal right to bring the suit. That’s force and effect in my book.

[nufsed]

Whya has Obama been using private attorneys up until now? It would seem that service could have been on the private attorney. I can’t see the judge assigning the DOJ if Obama said that they weren’t his representative.

[Tennessee Nana]

Then what ???

Does that American have no rights or protection under the law ???

What about the oath Barry Dunham-Soetoro swore to defend and unhold the Constitution ???

[nufsed]

If this is a late development perhaps a continuance will be requested, say until Jan 2013.