Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Lurking Libertarian
If you think this somehow now gives him standing to sue in a civilian court to have Obama's eligibility determined, no it doesn't.

Technically it does because Lakin can now show peculiarized harm from Obama's failure to answer the questions regarding his constitutional eligibility.

121 posted on 12/16/2010 2:31:16 PM PST by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies ]


To: edge919
Technically it does because Lakin can now show peculiarized harm from Obama's failure to answer the questions regarding his constitutional eligibility.

He was convictred in a military court of violating a lawful order. (In fact, he pleaded guilty to that charge.) So, barring a reversal on appeal (extremely unlikely given his guilty plea and his sworn admissions to the judge), it is now conclusively determined against him that he violated lawful orders. So he was injured not by Obama's failure to answer questions, but by his own admitted criminal acts. See, for example, the Supreme Court's decision in Heck v. Humphrey (1994) (unreversed criminal conviction bars any civil suit for damages based on that claim that that conviction was wrongful).

146 posted on 12/16/2010 2:43:40 PM PST by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson