... update at #406.
Posted on 09/21/2009 5:37:18 PM PDT by rxsid
Pending Litigation: Hawaii Confirms That Obama’s Vital Records Have Been Amended.
I will be assisting one of my readers in filing litigation in Hawaii state circuit court pursuant to her ongoing request for public information denied by Hawaii officials. (Readers of my blog will recognize her as MissTickly aka TerriK.)Correspondence sent to TerriK by Hawaii officials indicates that President Obama’s vital records have been amended and official records pertaining thereto are maintained by the state of Hawaii.
I will issue a full statement and press release on behalf of TerriK via this blog in the days ahead. This statement will include a complete history of correspondence between TerriK and Hawaii state officials in the Office of Information Practices (OIP) and the Department of Health (DoH).
[snip]STANDING
TerriK has standing to pursue this action under the statute. The UIPA manual states:
“Any person” may make a request for government records under part II, the Freedom of Information section of the UIPA. “Person” is defined broadly to include an individual, government agencies, partnerships and any other legal entities.
Under part II, a government agency generally may not limit access to public records based on who the requester is or the proposed use of the record.
-------------------------------------------------------------
I think it might be the "Immigration and Nationality Act 1952" a/k/a the "Mccarran Walter Immigration and Nationality Act"
The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) of 1952 (also known as the McCarran-Walter Act) restricted immigration into the U.S. and is codified under Title 8 of the United States Code.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1952
§ 1409. Children born out of wedlockhttp://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/search/display.html?terms=wedlock&url=/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001409----000-.html
[snip]
(c) Notwithstanding the provision of subsection (a) of this section, a person born, after December 23, 1952, outside the United States and out of wedlock shall be held to have acquired at birth the nationality status of his mother, if the mother had the nationality of the United States at the time of such person’s birth, and if the mother had previously been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year.
It appears to read the same, 1 year continuously present.
“The applicable law at the time was the Immigration and Nationality Act of like 1951...”
I think it might be the “Immigration and Nationality Act 1952” a/k/a the “Mccarran Walter Immigration and Nationality Act”
The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) of 1952 (also known as the McCarran-Walter Act) restricted immigration into the U.S. and is codified under Title 8 of the United States Code.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1952
§ 1409. Children born out of wedlock
[snip]
(c) Notwithstanding the provision of subsection (a) of this section, a person born, after December 23, 1952, outside the United States and out of wedlock shall be held to have acquired at birth the nationality status of his mother, if the mother had the nationality of the United States at the time of such person’s birth, and if the mother had previously been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year.
It appears to read the same, 1 year continuously present.
***
NEED to get ORIGINAL text of the bill to determine the controlling language in 1963.
USC only shows CURRENT law, as amended ...
Yeah, good point. I was trying to locate that earlier, without much success. If you find it, please post. Thanks!
5.56mm
Too bad they aren’t all Italian! Then, RICO would somehow become available to punish them. Apparently, RICO doesn’t apply to Kenyans.
"TerriK INVESTIGATION – PART 1: Hawaii Department of Health Directors Fukino and Okubo Are Guilty of Misdirection.
INTRODUCTION
The entire Presidential eligibility movement has been ridiculed as a fringe “conspiracy theory” by main stream media, members of Congress and even Judges speaking directly from the bench. This ridicule is largely due to public statements made by Hawaii Department of Health Director, Dr. Chiyome Fukino (see below) which testify that she has seen vital records maintained by her office which prove President Obama was born in Hawaii and that he has an original birth certificate on file there.
The ridicule has been broad, extending even to public investigators like myself who believe that President Obama was actually born in Hawaii. But reliance on Director Fukino and her Communications Director Janice Okubo are sadly misplaced. They are guilty of misdirecting the public away from vital records information made expressly available by statute where no privacy exceptions apply.
These accusations are not a matter of conjecture. They are a matter of fact and shall be proved. This, Part 1 of the full report, will illustrate multiple instances of misdirection.
BACKGROUND
The state of Hawaii enacted the Uniform Information Practices Act (UIPA) as a means by which the public may have free and open access to all information maintained by the Government. While some information is obviously restricted to protect the privacy of individuals, the intent of the statute is clear; to help the public access government held information.
...
Unfortunately, officials at the Hawaii Department of Health (DoH) have been using the statute for the opposite purpose it was intended. This investigation will bear witness to blatant offensive abuses of the law which have clearly frustrated the purpose and scope of the statute, a statute intended to do just the opposite.
...
Tactics used by Department of Health Director Fukino and Communications Director Okubo have frustrated the true intent of the UIPA. TerriK and myself will request that the Director of the Office of Information Practices – an office created to enforce the UIPA – institute disciplinary proceedings against Fukino and Okubo based upon their wrongful conduct concerning multiple UIPA requests made by TerriK.
Whether intentional fraud was involved is an issue that must be looked into by law enforcement.
...
Since Director Fukino viewed “vital records” in making her second public statement, TerriK then assumed that President Obama’s original birth certificate had been amended and/or corrected – in that had it not been so changed, only the original birth certificate (singular) would have required access by Fukino rather than “vital records” (plural).
TerriK’s research into the UIPA also revealed that if Obama’s records had been amended, Obama was required by the UIPA statute to make preliminary UIPA requests himself – to see his own records and also to amend or correct them.
...
The following statement was made by Director Fukino in an email to TerriK on August 6, 2009:
From: “Fukino, Chiyome L.”
Date: August 6, 2009 3:54:02 PM EDT
To: [MissTickly, real name and email redacted] oip@hawaii.gov
Subject: RE: Appeal for urgency
Dear [TerriK (real name redacted)],
State law prohibits the Department of Health from disclosing any information about a Hawaii vital record unless the requestor has a direct and tangible interest in the record. This includes verification of vital records and all the information contained in a record. For information on the law that governs vital records in the State of Hawaii, please refer to HRS §338 at http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/…
Sincerely,
Chiyome L. Fukino, MD
Director
Hawaii State Department of Health
The statute cited - HRS 338 – operates – according to Fukino’s statement above – to prevent the disclosure of “any information about a Hawaii vital record” to the public at large. Unfortunately, that is a blatantly false statement. In fact, it appears to be intentionally fraudulent having coming from an official who certainly knows it’s false.
...
The public is entitled, with no exception provided by law, to examine all index data referred to in HRS 338-18(d) pertaining to each and every vital record on file in the state of Hawaii for President Obama.
Due to her lingering intuition, TerriK kept the investigation going, but it wasn’t until this week that she learned about and understood the importance of HRS 338-18(d). She was completely baffled when I brought it to her attention. Throughout her voluminous correspondence with the DoH and OIP, subsection (d) had never been mentioned to her.
The general public are not skilled in complex statutory interpretation. Nor are they generally skilled in legal and document research. The UIPA was created to assist the public in these difficult areas. Moreover, according to the UIPA Manual, a bias exists for public disclosure of information. Yet, Director Fukino not only failed to inform TerriK about the mandated availability of index data listed in 338-18(d), Fukino insisted that “State law prohibits the Department of Health from disclosing any information about a Hawaii vital record” to the public at large.
But “index data” is “information about a Hawaii vital record”.
Because of the ongoing misdirection, you might believe an exception to 338-18(d) exists. You would be wrong. The very same statute – at 338-18(d) – provides:
(d) Index data consisting of name and sex of the registrant, type of vital event, and such other data as the director may authorize shall be made available to the public."
... update at #406.
"Who is Eligible to Apply for an Amended Certificate of Birth?
As provided by law (HRS §§338-17.7, 338-20.5), the following persons may apply for an amended certificate of birth:
[snip]
A person born in a foreign country who has been legally adopted in the State of Hawaii."
http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/vital-records/newbirthcert.html
~~Donofrio update
To: [MissTickly, real name and email redacted] oip@hawaii.gov
Does this mean MissTickly is an employee of the state of HI?
A very good chance Tickly is if she uses a .gov mail server.
Wow! Leo said that others can now request docs from HI following on what Terri K found?
People need to swamp Hawaii’s Dept. of Health demanding the docs. Maybe raise funds to help Leo with the case and to find a trust attny in HI to work with leo??
They already slammed the door on Miss Tickly. I don’t think her being there is going to change their minds. It will take a lawsuit.
No, it just looks funky how it was posted.
It was obvious to us Fukino and her silly sidekick Okubo where BS'ing the public to cover for OButt.
The public is entitled, with no exception provided by law, to examine all index data referred to in HRS 338-18(d) pertaining to each and every vital record on file in the state of Hawaii for President Obama.
LoL! Going to use Hawaii's on laws and rules to hoist Hawaii @&$ on their own petard.
That's a given. Isn't that the reason why Leo is heading to Hawaii...he is heading to Hawaii to start a lawsuit?
Yes, and they are going to want to try and avoid a lawsuit.
Talk about a rock and a hard place...... Threats on one side and trial on the other. There is nothing that could make me want to switch places with Fukino or Akubo.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.