[David]

What strikes me is this, the constitution clearly states that you have to be qualified to RUN, Obama isn't qualified to run, and has not proved that he IS qualified to run.... isn't THAT injury? Can Berg clarify that point?

That is not what the Constitution says--the language is "shall not be eligible to the office"; a person who is not natural born is not eligible to act as President.

And running isn't injury--how is Berg or anyone else hurt by the fact that someone is running for President? Direct injury getting standing is where the person gets elected and can and does take action that damages your economic or personal interest or assets in some fashion. Even then, there is room for argument.

If you really want to try to understand operation of the standing issue and how someone might have standing, you should read the Michigan Law Review articles.

[hoosiermama]

Please provide a link to the Michigan law review article. Thanks

[Just mythoughts]

IF said person is a ‘fraud’ then is not injury caused by the act of voting for a ‘fraud’. IF one has the right to vote how can another have standing to take that right away?

[danamco]

And running isn't injury--how is Berg or anyone else hurt by the fact that someone is running for President? Direct injury getting standing is where the person gets elected and can and does take action that damages your economic or personal interest or assets in some fashion. Even then, there is room for argument.

This juridico Mumbo Jumbo language gets my head spinning!

If I am left with the ONLY option that a criminal person is "running" (means on the ballot) and I have no OTHER choices (I cannot and should not be an enabler) to vote for a bona-fide candidate, I am sure being injured, am I not!!

By voting for this candidate I became a guilty enambler!!!