[Lurking Libertarian]

Secondly Bergdoll v. Kane has already ruled that any attorney seeking to defend and protect the U.S. Constitution HAS STANDING!!!!!!!!! Therefore, ANY suit seeking to protect and defend the Constitution regarding the natural born status of Obama being REJECTED due to lack of standing is FALSE and unconstitutional!

Bergdoll v. Kane is a Pennsylvania state-court case. It is not a federal case and has nothing to do with federal law. There is a long line of SCOTUS decisions holding that a plaintiff has no standing in federal court if he is raising a "generalized grievance" that all citizens have in common. Such claims have to be decided by the elected branches, not the courts.

[conservativegramma]

Bergdoll v. Kane is a Pennsylvania state-court case. It is not a federal case and has nothing to do with federal law.

Maybe not, but its still precedent which can be used in any state.

There is a long line of SCOTUS decisions holding that a plaintiff has no standing in federal court if he is raising a "generalized grievance" that all citizens have in common.

And there is a long line of SCOTUS decisions which clearly define the definition of Natural Born and that Obama isn't it.