Judge tosses lawsuit challenging Obama citizenship

AP ^ | 10/25/08 | staff

[pissant]

PHILADELPHIA (AP) — A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit challenging Barack Obama's qualifications to be president.

U.S. District Judge R. Barclay Surrick on Friday night rejected the suit by attorney Philip J. Berg, who alleged that Obama was not a U.S. citizen and therefore ineligible for the presidency. Berg claimed that Obama is either a citizen of his father's native Kenya or became a citizen of Indonesia after he moved there as a boy.

[pissant]

Ah, so the MSM decided to finally cover it.

[Attention Surplus Disorder]

“Surrick ruled that Berg lacked standing to bring the case, saying any harm from an allegedly ineligible candidate was “too vague and its effects too attenuated to confer standing on any and all voters.”

Welcome to the future. It doesn’t matter one bit who becomes our president. God help us.

[skeeter]

Surrick ruled that Berg lacked standing to bring the case, saying any harm from an allegedly ineligible candidate was "too vague and its effects too attenuated to confer standing on any and all voters

This from a man who supposedly interprets the US Constitution.

The irony is unbearable.

[pissant]

Good news for Arnie. He can run against Obama in 2012.

[JerseyDvl]

Typical MO for the drive-by media...lol. So is this issue officially dead?

[firebrand]

Yes, at the point where it does us more harm than good, of course.

[TexasGreg]

I wonder who WOULD have standing?
If those of us who are being asked to vote for President don’t have standing to know if one or both of the candidates running for the office qualify for that office under the terms of the Constitution, then who has the standing???

Appeal this puppy to the US Supremes. They’ll probably refuse to hear it too ... but might as well run it all the way.

WHY did the jackass judge wait so long to rule?

[DoWhatsRight]

Clinton appointee...figures, hey elections DO MATTER!

[LibFreeUSA]

i thought if you won first prize, but then it’s discovered that you cheated to get the first prize, it then goes to the runnerup? Isn’t that the American way?

[Zack Attack]

Does he have to be elected before anyone has standing or what? I don’t get this “standing” issue.

[pissant]

The GOP would have standing, wouldn’t it. Bu the limp wristers there are afraid of making the dems mad at them.

[PowderMonkey]

In other words, the Constitution has just been flushed down the toilet by judicial fiat.

[Beckwith]

What is Obama hiding?

This question needs to go viral -- use the link and write a couple of emails -- take a minute:

What is Senator Obama hiding?  Why the lawyers?  If Obama is eligible to occupy the Office of the President of the United States of America, let him present the vault copy of his birth certificate to prove it and end all the speculation.

E-Mail addresses for your elected representatives, talk shows, the media, and even write letters to the editor -- email your friends -- comment at your favorite blogs and forums -- demand an answer!

[skeeter]

If something as CLEAR as the physical requirements that must be met in order to be eligible to lead this country can be so airily waved away, WHAT part of the Constitution is safe?

I certainly hope this is appealed, whether it has an effect on this election or not.

[LuxMaker]

From the looks of it, the U.S. Constitution was flushed a long time ago by a great many people.

[PowderMonkey]

In a nutshell “standing” means it's your business. You have a stake in proceedings. “No standing” means it's none of your business. That's the second time this week an activist judge has played the “it's none of your business” card in favor of the Lib Dems, and tossed the case out of court. How much more can this Republic endure before being sundered beyond saving?

[BigEdLB]

I AM CONFUSED This Is Wierd

[Cicero]

OK, now someone explain to me how it took TWO MONTHS for the judge to come up with this decision? The obvious explanation is that he wanted to dismiss the lawsuit before the election, but he did not want to leave enough time for an appeal.

NO standing? How is it that any American citizen with a right to vote, or even a child for that matter, would not be affected if a lying fraud of a foreign citizen gets elected president after refusing to produce any documentation?

It’s obvious that ANY CITIZEN has a standing to bring such a suit. But, yes, it was predictable that a typical judge in our broken judicial system would do exactly what this judge has done: delay, obfuscate, and refuse justice.

[webschooner]

I knew the judge had to have been appointed by a Demokat prez, I just didn’t know which one.

What an absurd ruling by a hack judge — the judge basically said just because you are a citizen, you don’t have standing to question if the POTUS candidate is qualified to be a POTUS candidate.

Then who the hell does have standing to bring up the question of whether the candidate qualifies under the Constitution??

[Zack Attack]

In a nutshell “standing” means it's your business. You have a stake in proceedings. “No standing” means it's none of your business.

Thanks. That's kinda what I assumed but if a US citizen has no standing, (ie - is not affected by the outcome), then who is?