Frivolous, as you know, does have a legal definition as a suit without legal merit and brings in the possibility of sanctions against the plaintiff. It's more than the judges discriptive term. So I don't see him using that word losely.
Also, as the judge noted in his decision, there is a great deal of reluctance on the part of civil courts to interfere with military order and discipline. The judge was required to consider the case on its merits and empowered to make a decision based on his conclusions. His disdain for Birthers aside, he does identify some valid points; Rhodes can offer no credible evidence or reasonably valid arguements to support her position and cannot demonstrate any sort of standing to sue. So in the end what sort of choice did he have?
None. To be fair, the highly visible face of "the birthers" is their self-proclaimed leader, Orly Taitz. The judge's disdain is therefore directed at her, and through her antics and missteps, she's earned it.
Why would Taitz even think she could prevail in Judge Land's court this time, when she was shot down by Land on a similar case two months ago?
I believe Taitz has no interest in winning -- remaining in the spotlight is what this is about.
While Taitz’ intentions may be good, she is inept. The CA case is much more likely to go forward. The DOJ motion to dismiss is very weak and specifically did not address Carter's statement that the case will be decided on the merits.
Based on that, I think he is going to order production of the long form BC. I also think he is going to pretty much ignore Taitz and focus on the pleadings of Kreep. He seems to know how to approach this case.