You’re still an Obot clown. When we mean merits of the case against Obama - means going to TRIAL. A full blown case where witness and discovery can be presented and crossed examined. It is in the judge’s prerogative to take a case to trial even if even he thinks that the plaintiff has no standing if he believe justice will still be served. For obvious reason they have not taken that course.
There has been no trial to flesh out those CLAIMS. Without discovery in this case against Obama who hides and controls all the relevant facts against him in the Executive Branch and other institutions around the world, the case is not going anywhere, unless there are leaks, and if whistle blowers come forward.
The legal definition
“on the merits adj. referring to a judgment, decision or ruling of a court based upon the facts presented in evidence and the law applied to that evidence. A judge decides a case “on the merits” when he/she bases the decision on the fundamental issues and considers technical and procedural defenses as either inconsequential or overcome. Example: An attorney is two days late in filing a set of legal points and authorities in opposition to a motion to dismiss. Rather than dismiss the case based on this technical procedural deficiency, the judge considers the case “on the merits” as if this mistake had not occurred.”
According to Lamberth, Taitz failed to state the merits of her claims...as in standing. She has no merits to her claim because of her lack of standing according to Lamberth. Or in the RICO part, her evidence didn’t rise to the level in the opinion of the court to go forthwith.
In other words, that is a “technical procedural deficiency” as the definition above says.
If this case goes forward and overcomes those technical procedural deficiencies, we may get to see what Obama is hiding from the public and the courts to what his legitimate factual record as in:
-The Hawaiian birth records
- border entry records
- State Department records
- Passport records
- Education records
- Foreign government records
- Other private records
Hey Soros and DNC operatives, you pay this Obot clown too much whatever it is.
Find a prosecutor who will at least investigate Obama via a Grand Jury with subpoena power for forgery or fraud and who might issue an indictment, then request a jury trial.
Voila! A case can be “decided on the merits” after a real trial!
But even in a criminal jury trial, there will be a motion to dismiss as soon as the gavel falls.
In civil litigation it is often judges alone who render opinions on the merits or lack thereof. That happens all the time. Since no Obama eligibility lawsuit has been reversed on appeal, the summary dismissals have obviously been appropriate including seven appeals denied at the US Supreme Court level.
There is no law which requires a citizen, even an elected federal official to produce the documents and records that you mention solely for the curiosity of one’s political opposition.
If Obama hasn’t been forthcoming enough for you about his past and his records, vote against him in 2012.
Now you are admitting that this case discussed and all other eligibility cases have never been decided on the merits.
In your last post you were saying that the court already determined the case on the merits where you put in capital letters : "THIS IS A VERDICT ISSUED ON THE MERITS OF THE CLAIM." In the subsequent post [501], I showed you beyond a shadow of a doubt how wrong you are, which if anyone who looks up and down this 500+ post thread can see it happens with regularity. Hell, it happens everyday to you on FR.
YOU: There is no law which requires a citizen, even an elected federal official to produce the documents and records that you mention solely for the curiosity of one’s political opposition.
Running away to another area of the Obama eligibility issue after you have been slapped down as usual. It's more than 'curiosity' Obot, The guy who occupies the White House is criminal.
YOU: If Obama hasn’t been forthcoming enough for you about his past and his records, vote against him in 2012.
That's a given without saying. I doubt Obama will run if there is a chance to expose his hidden past. And no "if" about it. He's a "fruad" or fraud in every way you look at it.