I don’t know this to be true or not. Do you have links to the filings in all 12 cases?? IIUC, not all these cases named Obama directly. Some involves either Secretaries of State or elections officials in particular states. And what’s your point. None of this changes the fact that Obama still has no evidence to show that he didn’t remain an Indonesian citizen up through adulthood?? Are Obama’s lawyers supposed to file something they don’t have??
My point is that Obama hasn’t needed any evidence. When any Supreme Court Justice is considering granting “cert” they request (which means order)the appellee to file a response to what the appellants are charging. Thus far, no Justice has requested a response to an Obama-related eligibility appeal at the Supreme Court.
Which is fortunate since he has none. The denial of standing isn't something to celebrate. And it's lazy crutch. They teach that in law school:
"Standing doctrine confuses both lower courts and litigants, because the Court manipulates the doctrine to serve other objectives. When the Court wants to reach the merits of a case, the standing doctrine is often relaxed. Conversely, when the Court wishes to avoid deciding the merits of a case--or perhaps, when it wants to shut a whole category of cases out of court --, the requirements for standing are tightened."