I believe you are incorrect in that. As much as Lakin would like to make it all about Obama, it's not. It is about his refusal to deploy with his unit or his refusal to obey the order of his commanding officer. Obama did not personally pick this officer for deployment, nor did he personally order the unit to deploy. There is no way to tie Obama with these charges other than some vague "but he's the commander-in-chief" nonsense, so there is no way to link Obama's actions with these charges. No judge will allow disclosure of anything relating to Obama based on that.
I believe you are incorrect in that. As much as Lakin would like to make it all about Obama, it’s not. It is about his refusal to deploy with his unit or his refusal to obey the order of his commanding officer. Obama did not personally pick this officer for deployment, nor did he personally order the unit to deploy. There is no way to tie Obama with these charges other than some vague “but he’s the commander-in-chief” nonsense, so there is no way to link Obama’s actions with these charges. No judge will allow disclosure of anything relating to Obama based on that.
Can you cite the case where this precent was established?
There is not one.
The defense case is not following the orders based on the CIC not being legitmate. That is their defense. A judge would be risking a complete overturn in the case if they did not allow the defense, at least, discovery on the issue, in the form of a legit long form Birth Cert.
A judge might have a little more leeway if it is not allowed into evidence....however....a judge would be foolish to have a case thrown out, or held up on appeal, because they did not allow the defendant discovery...