That’s the beauty of a vague order of dismissal. The judge said the suit was “frivolous” and you have maneuvered that into an adjudication as to legal definition of property, the correct interpretation of an Interpleader complaint and the interchangeability of duty and loyalty.
Does an officer have a duty (a/k/a loyalty) to present his credentials upon arrival at post? Shouldn’t the Commander in Chief do the same?
The judge said the interpleader part of the suit was frivolous. I am giving you my opinion of why that is. If you think there was a different basis for the judge's decision, please let me know. (I suspect we will get a fuller understanding of the judge's reasoning when he rules on defendants' motion to dismiss the case in its entirety.)
Does an officer have a duty (a/k/a loyalty) to present his credentials upon arrival at post? Shouldn’t the Commander in Chief do the same?
An officer doesn't present his credentials to a court, and if some citizen filed a lawsuit claiming that an officer's credentials were forged, the court would dismiss the case, because reviewing credentials is not a judicial function. Obama's credentials were judged sufficient when Vice President Cheney and the full membership of the House and Senate unanimously voted on January 8 to declare him Presdent-elect. If they made a mistake, it is not one a court is going to second-guess.