Replies

This Birther or believer thread is a second thread on the issue of Judge Carter's ruling in the Alan Keyes Santa Ana case.

Any one who has not done so might gain some benefit from reading my comment in response to doug at "Federal Judge to hear Obama Birth Certificate on the Merits!" Tuesday, July 14, 2009 7:00:27 AM · 322 of 368

In reading the general Free Republic commentary, there are some things everyone needs to understand again. These are technical legal questions and there are specific rules governing legal proceedings in any court which must be complied with or you don't get your case heard on the merits.

It isn't magic; it isn't luck; usually the bias of the judge only kicks in when your lawyer has screwed up so badly that the judge knows you can't successfully appeal what he has done.

All lawyers are not the same; all lawyers don't have the same degree of experience and background to manage the same level of complexity in these kinds of cases nor to exercise the same level of detailed precise care in preparing and filing pleadings or getting cases served and filed properly.

All of the (Obama Citizenship) cases I have seen involve some element of the kind of technical imprecision that keeps these cases from being heard on the merits. To some degree, even the current cases which have a better level of access to factual material (because people involved in earlier cases have done a great deal of work) where counsel is learning from the mistakes of prior parties, still are defective.

And the docket doesn't always disclose what has happened in the technical sense. I don't have time to go looking for original court documents although I could probably get some of them. But as to the Keyes Santa Ana case, a couple of additional things have appeared to me that I did not point out in the earlier post.

This case was originally commenced as an action against Obama prior to his inauguration as President on the theory that he was a private citizen--you just get him served properly and you get him in court.

Whether he really did not understand that the case was pending or not, he had a reasonable position that he had not been properly served and thus that the case was not properly pending against him. And that is what Judge Carter originally ruled.

Again, a fairly simple screw up by counsel--shouldn't have happened; but, as the WND article pointed out, probably, the case wasn't properly served and once he gets in office as President, you can't sue him that way and get him into court on some reasonable schedule.

On the motion for rehearing, Judge Carter says, "OK, well you have this whine about not getting a hearing on the merits--maybe you serve the US Attorney and proceed on the merits on the theory that he improperly holds office".

Now you get to the entire series of technical problems involved in sueing the President of the United States while he is in office and I tend to doubt that you are likely to overcome the objections that will appear before his term is over.

Now I want to expound further on the other Thursday Case, Cook, which is apparently also Orly Taitz's case and I will do that separately addressed to Lucy and she can post it where she deems it appropriate to do so.

There is some merit to John Mirse's comment to which this is incidentally directed. But the real initial point is that if you had done a decent job of dealing with the technical legal, you might well have been successful. If you can't get your legal work done correctly, focus on the fact that this guy is not really the President may well have the result of limiting his ability to inact damaging legislation.

.

Thanks, David.

Ping to an important comment at #94.

.

I’ve noticed that too, many cases having technical issues. Problem is, there are more people like me that don’t understand them to see them and not enough people like you to explain them.

[[ Monday's hearing was on a request by Taitz for a default judgment, since she notified the president of the action weeks ago, and his lawyers failed to respond. (The man was duly served back in January prior to his swearing in)

U.S. District Judge David O. Carter ruled in favor of Taitz and granted the "motion for reconsideration of order to show cause or in the alternative to certify question for appeal.". A trial date will be set and Taitz "will immediately request access to Obama's birth records and other documentation that could determine his eligibility to occupy the Oval Office." ]]