Thank you, thank you, thank you! Please keep us informed. I am very interested in following the issue.
I am not attorney but it seems to me that a competent government attorney would have said, “Mr. Obama promptly provide all documentation regarding your natural born status. Stop wasting my time and the taxpayer's money!”
A competent government attorney would have said, “Mr. Obama, if you are not a natural born citizen, you need to find the best private criminal attorney possible, because you are facing prison time.”
TABLE OF CONTENTS
III. ARGUMENT
1. This Court Lacks Subject Matter Jurisdiction Of
This Action
A. Plaintiffs Lack Standing Herein
1. No Plaintiff Can Show The Required
Concrete, Traceable Injury-in-Fact
To Provide Standing Herein
With respect to Alan Keyes, and Gail Lightfoot, it is alleged that they “appeared on the California ballot as candidates for President or Vice President in the 2008 National Presidential elections . . .”
None of the Plaintiffs alleged to have “unique political
standing” has suffered anything remotely resembling the required “injury-in-fact,” traceable to Defendants’ conduct, to vest them with standing in this case.
Plaintiffs do not make clear the precise nature of their “unique political” injury, but to the extent that they are alleging that President Obama’s actions interfered with their prospects for successful election, such an injury is not a result of the actions of the Defendants. The FAC 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. Accordingly, the “unique[ly] political” Plaintiffs cannot establish standing on this basis.
My Seizethecarp analysis:
I am not an attorney, but I had to research legal ethics to file a complaint with the TX bar against my ex-wife’s attorney (went nowhere, of course).
The above argument by the DOJ in claiming that Keyes in particular lacks standing strikes me as being beyond “zealous advocacy” and crossing over into “intentionally misleading the tribunal”, which can be sanctioned by the judge and the bar.
DOJ seems to me to be flat out lying when they say “…to the extent that they are alleging that President Obama’s actions interfered with their prospects for successful election, such an injury is not a result of the actions of the Defendants.”
If plaintiffs can show that Obama knew or should have known that he was not an NBC at birth as a result of his stipulated dual citizenship at birth, or that he was born in Kenya, or that he dropped his US citizenship to obtain either a Kenyan or Indonesian passport and failed to re-nationalize, Keyes, at the very least would be injured by Obamas actions of knowingly being on the ballot while being ineligible to be president.
Most damning is when DOJ says “The FAC 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.” This seems to be an outright admission of Keyes’ standing, but it is couched in an attempt to claim that somehow Keyes’ standing doesn’t exist because Keyes wasn’t on the ballot in enough states!!!
From Orly’s Facebook page: Someone posted that the hearing was delayed in starting until 11:00 Pacific and has now ended. Updates should come soon.