Replies

Counsel makes these allegations although a “short-form” birth certificate has been made publicly available which indicates that the President was born in Honolulu, Hawaii on August 4, 1961.

Right there. He is saying in effect that council is asking for Obama's B/C even though, in the judges opinion, his short-form b/c has been made public.

I don't see how that sentence can be taken as anything other then the judge believes what has been released online is Obama's authentic short-form B/C. The judge is in effect saying "Obama's b/c is online and is good enough for me!"

This is where my question comes from. Shouldn't the judge have determined if the image released on the net is in fact genuine before stating it is Obama's short-form B/C? Does that make more sense?

Ok, yes. I think I understand what you're asking now.

The Judge's statement that "a 'short-form' birth certificate" has been made publicly available is true. That's not the judge's opinion. That is a fact that cannot be contested -- and that Orly states that in her papers. Orly contends that the short-form/COLB that was released is a fraud, but she does not contest that a short form was released.

And, here, the Judge isn't saying that the COLB is authentic. He didn't say that the short-form was authentic, or confirmed to be state-issued, "official," or anything of the sort. He merely said that Taitz wants an "official" long form even though a short form had already been released publicly. (Note: He didn't say an "official" short form.) Given that Orly doesn't contest that Obama publicly released a short form indicating that he was born in Hawaii, that statement by the judge was merely a statement of uncontested fact.

Now, whether the COLB is authentic is an entirely different issue - and was simply not at issue at this phase of the litigation, and the Judge did not rule on that issue. Stated another way, no, the judge shouldn't -- and he didn't -- determine whether the image released on the net is in fact genuine. But he could -- and did (as did Orly in her briefs) -- note that one had been released.

Let me try this a different way. IF the Judge had determined that the COLB was authentic, don't you think that the DOJ and Obama's attorneys would have immediately filed that opinion with all the courts where cases were still pending, notifying the courts that a judge had already ruled that the COLB was authentic and, so, the claims by Taitz/Kerchner/Hollister/Berg that he was born in Kenya had to be dismissed? And, since the media always seems to report when Taitz "loses," wouldn't that have been a breaking news story? I'm fairly certain that that would have happened if any judge had ruled that the COLB was authentic. But - it didn't happen, because this Judge did not rule that way. He noted a simple, uncontested, fact that a COLB had been released.