Skip to comments.High Court takes Pass on Obama REsidency Suit
Posted on 12/08/2008 7:44:10 AM PST by Froggie
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court has turned down an emergency appeal from a New Jersey man who says President-elect Barack Obama is ineligible to be president because he was a British subject at birth.
The court did not comment on its order Monday rejecting the call by Leo Donofrio of East Brunswick, New Jersey, to intervene in the presidential election. Donofrio says that since Obama had dual nationality at birth -- his mother was American and his Kenyan father at the time was a British subject -- he cannot possibly be a "natural born citizen," one of the requirements the Constitution lists for eligibility to be president.
Donofrio also contends that two other candidates, Republican John McCain and Socialist Workers candidate Roger Calero, also are not natural-born citizens and thus ineligible to be president.
At least one other appeal over Obama's citizenship remains at the court. Philip J. Berg of Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania, argues that Obama was born in Kenya, not Hawaii as Obama says and the Hawaii secretary of state has confirmed.
Berg says Obama also may be a citizen of Indonesia, where he lived as a boy. Federal courts in Pennsylvania have dismissed Berg's lawsuit.
Ms. Fukino needs to be deposed in a civil suit and asked many detailed questions about what she saw, her motivations, who she voted for, etc.
“You mean we rally around the cause, but are hopelessly outnumbered, fight on, and are all killed to the last man....”
I mean this could be the point from which things could start back to bite them in the @$$!
Who knows, there may be more out there than we suspect with operating brains and grit in their hearts—the fat broad ain’t sung yet....
So the strongest (IMO) suit against Obama has been dismissed. I guess we know where this is going.
America is BROKEN.....BROKEN....EVERYTHING and EVERYBODY in POWER ARE BROKEN......CORRUPT....GUTLESS.....WEAK.
Donofrio’s lawsuit was always very questionable, in my opinion. It focused on the fact that in Donofrio’s opinion because Obama’s dad was a Kenyan Obama was not eligible for the POTUS. The problem is that there isn’t anything that really supports this claim, except perhaps some books from the 1700s that explain the natural law basis of citizenship as based on the father.
I am not in the least bit surprised they rejected it, as I argued they would and should last week.
It is the Berg lawsuit that is far more interesting. It raises the issue most of us are most interested in: why can’t we see the birth certificate?
You might have been able to get there on the Donofrio suit, but you would have probably given creedence to his wacky “three types of citizens” claim. (Citizen via Birth, Naturalized Citizen, and Natural Born Citizen using his “dad’s the key” argument.)
Seeing as this concept has never existed in our law it was unlikely that the SCOTUS was going to introduce it at this late date.
Now the idea that you have to check qualifications for office has a long pedigree in American law, and is understandable to most citizens. (And logical. And correct.)
This has always been about defining something that's never been clearly explained, and defining it in a way that best suits our purpose. If it was clear from the constitution that Obama couldn't be President, then either Clinton or McCain would have jumped on it.
With all due respect, why should the political affiliation of the plaintiff matter one bit? Aren't legal cases supposed to be decided on the facts? I guess I'm just naive.
Why should this decision surprise us? Government at all levels has been a HUGE failure and when the highest court in the land won’t even inspect the simple appeal to authenticate if the President-elect has a valid citizenship
required for office then we have no faith in government.
We’ve now become a nation more like the tyrannical British rulers that the founders revolted against.
A slap in the face to American’s and an invitation to kaos....yeb, right on track with the plan
You're wrong. The strongest suit by far is the one by Alan Keyes. He was a presidential candidate; has standing to bring such a suit, and has addressed the ramifications of ineligible person holding the office therein.
If HIS suit is dismissed, and we don't all take to the streets, then we're just a bunch of “fair weather patriots”!
Capable? Berg is a loon. He's a 911 truther who sued Bush and Cheney for conspiring to committ the 911 attacks. He also sued Bush claiming Bush v Gore was wrongly decided. Guess what this "capable" lawyer lost both cases and a third he filed against the Bush admin for covering up details of the 911 attacks. It's mind-boggling that FReepers would now back this fruit bat. After his 911 suits he should have been disbarred. Obama couldn't have picked a better loser than Berg to bring suit against him.
Not really. I personally never thought Donofrio’s brief was worth the paper it was printed on. Berg’s suit was always the stronger. Donofrio’s was based on a legal theory with no supporting statutory or case law, to wit, that a person who could claim dual citizenship at birth is not a ‘natural born citzen’. Berg’s is based on a demand that Obama prove he was a citizen at birth, i.e. that he satisfied the prima facia meaning of ‘natural born citizen’, and thus involves nothing other than an issue of fact, and Obama’s refusal to establish a factual basis for his Constitutional eligibility.
I wish a serving member of the armed forces were a plaintiff or a coplaintiff on either Berg’s suit or another based on the same legal theory. It would be harder to claim lack of standing if a plaintiff had sworn an oath to defend the Constitution, and was facing the possibility of having a Constitutionally inelibible purported Commander-in-Chief.
The big guns in radio now have a story to tell, since it’s finally been let loose by the MSM. Now, they can do their own research and some interviews! Anyone out there got the guts?
Don't hold your breath. Those inside D.C. protect their own, regardless of ideology. The SC is not about to upset the apple cart, regardless of the merits of this case.
You won’t have evidence of that unless they do the same with Berg’s suit. Donofrio’s was based on a legal theory he cut out of whole cloth, and probably should have been declined without comment. Berg’s on the other hand, depends on no novel legal reasoning.
Well said Gunny!
Prayers for Dr. Keyes pursuit of justice!
irish pennant....where have I heard that before?
Thank you for your response—much appreciated.
GnySgt USMC (Ret.)
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.