Obama birth certificate lawsuit dismissed (Andy Martin's Hawaii suit)

Political Carnival ^ | 11/21/08 | staff

[pissant]

May I just point out that Republican Governor Lingle was an enthusiastic supporter of John McCain?

A Circuit Court judge has dismissed Internet author Andy Martin's lawsuit seeking to obtain a copy of President-elect Barack Obama's Hawai'i birth certificate.

Judge Bert Ayabe upheld arguments from Gov. Linda Lingle's administration that Martin — a political opponent of Obama — had no standing under state law to obtain a copy of the document.

The decision, issued late Wednesday, first denied Martin's "emergency motion" for production of the birth certificate.

Andy Martin is a lying scumbag.

[pissant]

I guess the internet powerhouse was ruled to have no standing.

[rumraisin]

I love the headline on his website:
“Welcome to Andy Martin’s inspirational life story and biography.”

Yup, he’s a lesson for us all.

[Fawn]

I heard this issue is in the Supreme Court:

SUPREME COURT RULING ON OBAMA'S ELIGIBIILITY FOR PRESIDENT

[pissant]

Not Martin’s case though. That would be Berg’s and or Deofino’s case. And the AIP/Keyes case has yet to be heard in CA.

[autumnraine]

Can someone please tell me who has standing? It seems no one in this country has standing to request proof to a court of law (not an internet website like factcheck.org) of Obama’s eligibility.

Just the fact that he can give it to factcheck.org, but refuses to show a valid birth certificate to a court speaks volumes as far as I’m concerned.

[pissant]

It does speak volumes. I pray the SCOTUS understands the implications here. If they do not require Obama prove his birth situation, then I will not recognize him as legitimate, and either will 1/2 the country.

[Michael.SF.]

Not being an attorney, I am not clear as to the legal definition of who as “standing”, so I cannot address that issue. But as far as the several lawsuits on this subject, the one in New Jersey may have the best chance of success, as that one is filed against the NJ Secretary of State, who is required by NJ law to confirm that all candidates are indeed qualified for office.

[pissant]

Keyes’ case in CA is also pretty solid. He was a political opponent on the CA ballot.

[Michael.SF.]

Keyes’ case in CA is also pretty solid

True. And though Keyes is a bit of a strange duck, he is nobody's fool, I wish him nothing but the best!

[Parmy]

Gee! I had to show my birth certificate when I signed up for Social Security. I guess I can now run for President without it.

[OneWingedShark]

>Standing?

Gorge Soros, the Greys and/or Reptilians, Magic 8-Balls...
Nope, citizens, the constitution, and donors to the political party which provided endorsement are NOT covered.

[/sarc]

[Mike Fieschko]

Can someone please tell me who has standing?

A member of the Electoral College, or, after they cast their votes, a Member of Congress. As for the latter, I believe that when the President of the Senate opens the sealed results of the Electoral College's voting, any Member may challenge the votes cast.

Maybe others have standing, but it seems from the Constitution that at least these people have standing.

[kidd]

As we are a representative democracy, we vote for electors, who in turn cast the actual vote for POTUS.

If there was an issue with the eligibility of an elector that you could possibly vote for, then you might have standing. But you do not vote for the POTUS. Thus you do not have standing in a court case involving this election.

The case in California involves a competing candidate (Keyes) and an elector (Richardson). I would be surprised if they do not have standing.

[1_Rain_Drop]

“Gee! I had to show my birth certificate when I signed up for Social Security. I guess I can now run for President without it.”

Sorry, you’re disqualified.
You admitted that you have a birth certificate, have touched it, have seen it, read it, and shown it. Your fingerprints are all over it.

As of Nov 4, 2008, “Change” is:
If you do not have a birth certification, you can run for President.

[NoLibZone]

"Can someone please tell me who has standing? It seems no one in this country has standing to request proof to a court of law (not an internet website like factcheck.org) of Obama’s eligibility."

Just the Top 3 in the hierarchy of standing in US Courts:

1. Gays with HIV here illegally trumps all
2. Lesbians with Talk Shows
3 Former Underground weathermen.

[patriot08]

Maybe we should be emailing somebody like Tom Tancredo.
He has standing.

[Revolting cat!]

An elector would have “standing”. Alan Keys does too, that may be sufficient.

[jamese777]

Under the laws of the state of Hawaii, the only proof of birth in the City of Honolulu, in the County of Honolulu, on the Island of Oahu that Obama need ever present is the Certificate of Live Birth that has been on the web since July.
Please read for yourselves the words at the very bottom of the Certificate: http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_6.jpg
In case you miss it, it says “This copy is prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding.” Then it lists the relevant Hawaii Revised Statutes that passage refers to.

[pissant]

It’s nice to be lectured by someone who apparently knows next to nothing about this story.

[jamese777]

“It’s nice to be lectured by someone who apparently knows next to nothing about this story.”

---

You’re most welcome, glad that I could help.
But rest assured, I have been reading both Phillip Berg’s “ObamaCrimes” and Andy Martin’s “Contrarian Commentary” web sites on a daily basis.