[jamese777]

There you go assuming your conclusion again. A certified copy of the Certificate of Live Birth, perhaps accompanied by a sworn statement as to authenticity, would still not indicate the citizenship status of his parents. Even the long form would not do that, although it would show that his father would have needed to be naturalized, since he was born in the British colony of Kenya. So even the long form would require a copy of BHO Sr’s naturalization papers, which of course don’t exist since he was never naturalized, only being in the US as a temporary resident student.

---

Only one lawsuit was adjudicated on the issue of Obama’s parent’s impact on his status as Natural Born, that’s Ankeny et. al. v The Governor of Indiana, Mitch Daniels. The original trial judge and the Indiana Court of Appeals both ruled that Obama qualifies as a Natural Born Citizen under Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution and those two courts dismissed the lawsuit that attempted to invalidate Obama’s receipt of Indiana’s Electoral votes on those grounds. Last week the Indiana Supreme Court rejected hearing an appeal in this case.
No other court has ruled on the issue of Obama’s parentage and its effect on his natural born citizenship.
Since Vice President Cheney certified Obama’s Electoral College votes and Chief Justice Roberts swore him in, he’s the President and can be removed only by impeachment and conviction by 67 Senators.

The people who would be most likely to be granted legal standing to sue Obama because they can show DIRECT harm are John McCain and/or the Republican National Committee. They have not sued nor have they entered an amicus brief in support of any Obama eligibility lawsuit. In fact, no nationally known conservative or Republican has joined any of the seventy-plus eligibility lawsuits that have been filed.

[bvw]

You wholly misrepresent the ruling in Ankeny.

http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/category/legal-cases/ankeny-v-governor-of-indiana/

There was NO trial, no presentation of evidence under subpoena and cross of witnesses. The case was dismissed. The ‘appeal’ only affirmed the dismissal.