All of Obama's Legal Cases

US Courts System ^ | 2/10/2009 | US Courts

[BP2]

338 Total Party matches for selection OBAMA, B
for ALL COURTS

Mon Feb 10 7:57:00 2009

Selections 1 through 54 (Page 1)

	Next 54

Civil Cases
	Name	Court	Case No.	Filed	NOS	Closed
1	OBAMA, B	ilcdce	3:2008cv03169	08/04/2008	440	08/15/2008
Armstead v. HSBC Card Services et al
2	OBAMA, B.	ilndce	1:2008cv04487	08/08/2008	550	09/23/2008
Luevano v. Obama et al
3	OBAMA, B. H.	hidce	1:2009cv00006	01/06/2009	441	01/27/2009
Roy v. Bush et al
4	OBAMA, B. H.	hidce	1:2009cv00041	01/29/2009	441
Roy v. Obama
5	OBAMA, B. H.	hidce	1:2008cv00362	08/11/2008	440	08/27/2008
Roy vs. USDC
6	OBAMA, B. H.	hidce	1:2008cv00424	09/22/2008	441	10/22/2008
Roy v. USA Govt et al
7	OBAMA, B. H.	hidce	1:2008cv00580	12/22/2008	441
Roy v. Obama et al
8	OBAMA, B.H.	hidce	1:2009cv00048	02/03/2009	440
Roy vs. Obama
9	OBAMA, B.H.	hidce	1:2008cv00448	10/08/2008	440	10/27/2008
Roy v. Federal Election Commission et al
10	OBAMA, BARACK	dedce	1:2009cv00014	12/29/2008	550
Gadson v. Obama et al
11	OBAMA, BARACK	nhdce	1:1997mc00024	12/04/1997	0	12/09/1997
WILSON MASTER FILE v. ALL DEFENDANTS, et al
12	OBAMA, BARACK	kyedce	3:2008cv00028	06/10/2008	530	07/11/2008
Becker v. Mukasey et al
13	OBAMA, BARACK	tnmdce	3:2008mc00036	02/01/2008		02/05/2008
Ervin v. Bush et al
14	OBAMA, BARACK	ilndce	1:2007cv00053	01/16/2007	550	01/16/2007
Awala v. Norgle et al
15	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2009cv00079	01/14/2009	550	01/14/2009
HYLAND v. OBAMA et al
16	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv00088	01/14/2005	550	11/25/2005
RIVERA v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
17	OBAMA, BARACK	candce	3:2007cv00109	01/09/2007	440
Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, Inc. et al v. Bush et al
18	OBAMA, BARACK	nddce	3:2008cv00126	12/16/2008	330
Gleeson v. McDonald
19	OBAMA, BARACK	tnmdce	3:2008cv00146	02/12/2008	440	02/12/2008
Ervin v. Bush et al
20	OBAMA, BARACK	txwdce	5:2008cv00159	02/28/2008	440	03/18/2008
Smith v. University of Texas At Austin et al
21	OBAMA, BARACK	nhdce	1:2008cv00185	05/09/2008	530	06/10/2008
Becker v. Blightler et al
22	OBAMA, BARACK	flndce	1:2007cv00187	09/28/2007	440	10/06/2008
MORRIS v. BUSH et al
23	OBAMA, BARACK	caedce	1:2006cv00195	02/22/2006	530	04/10/2006
(HC) Thomas v. Federal Congress et al
24	OBAMA, BARACK	flndce	1:2008cv00208	09/26/2008	440	12/12/2008
MORRIS v. LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO et al
25	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv00270	02/04/2005	530	04/09/2007
EL-MASHAD et al v. BUSH et al
26	OBAMA, BARACK	flmdce	3:2008cv00284	03/20/2008	441
Bloom et al v. The Democratic National Committe et al
27	OBAMA, BARACK	mndce	0:2008cv00360	02/11/2008	440	03/19/2008
Sinclair v. Obama et al
28	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv00492	03/10/2005	530	04/09/2007
AZIZ et al v. BUSH et al
29	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv00569	03/18/2005	530	04/09/2007
SALAHI et al v. BUSH et al
30	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv00748	04/11/2005	530	05/30/2007
ABOASSY et al v. BUSH et al
31	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv00765	04/15/2005	530
HABASHI et al v. BUSH et al
32	OBAMA, BARACK	ilndce	1:1996cv00823	02/13/1996	440	03/04/1996
Ewell v. Bd of Elect Comm, et al
33	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv00877	05/03/2005	530	04/09/2007
KHIALI-GUL v. BUSH et al
34	OBAMA, BARACK	flmdce	8:2008cv00948	03/20/2008	441	05/28/2008
Bloom et al v. The Democratic National Committe et al
35	OBAMA, BARACK	flmdce	3:2007cv00964	10/11/2007	440	11/26/2007
Herbert v. United States of America et al
36	OBAMA, BARACK	paedce	2:2006cv01055	03/09/2006	550	07/26/2006
RICHES v. BUSH et al
37	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv01124	06/07/2005	530	05/30/2007
MOUSOVI et al v. BUSH et al
38	OBAMA, BARACK	miwdce	1:2008cv01154	12/08/2008	440	01/06/2009
Hyland #228879 v. Levin et al
39	OBAMA, BARACK	flmdce	3:2008cv01164	12/04/2008	440
Herbert v. Obama et al
40	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv01189	06/14/2005	530	04/09/2007
KHALIFH et al v. BUSH et al
41	OBAMA, BARACK	flmdce	3:2008cv01201	12/15/2008	440	01/21/2009
Herbert v. United States of America et al
42	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2008cv01224	07/17/2008	530
GUL v. BUSH et al
43	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2008cv01228	07/17/2008	530
HADI v. BUSH et al
44	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2008cv01232	07/17/2008	530
BIN ATEF v. BUSH et al
45	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2008cv01237	07/17/2008	530
AL WADY v. BUSH et al
46	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv01353	07/05/2005	530	05/09/2007
SAIB et al v. BUSH et al
47	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2008cv01430	08/18/2008	550	09/11/2008
THORNTON-BEY v. OBAMA
48	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv01487	06/13/2008	530
SADKHAN v. BUSH et al
49	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv01497	07/29/2005	530
AL WIRGHI et al v. BUSH et al
50	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv01506	07/28/2005	530	05/15/2007
SHAFIIQ et al v. BUSH et al
51	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2005cv01592	08/09/2005	530
ATTASH et al v. BUSH et al
52	OBAMA, BARACK	moedce	4:2008cv01757	11/12/2008	550	01/08/2009
Towne v. Obama
53	OBAMA, BARACK	dcdce	1:2006cv01758	07/31/2008	530
SULIMAN et al v. BUSH et al
54	OBAMA, BARACK	candce	M:2006cv01791	08/14/2006	440
In re National Security Agency Telecommunications Records Litigation

Next 54 ALL of Obama, Soetoro Court Cases on Scribd

[DMZFrank]

RWR’s father was of Irish ancestry but was an NBC born on US soil, as was his Scots-Irish ancestored mother.

[El Gato]

A natural born citizen is one who, at birth, is conferred citizenship status and thus didn't have to become a “naturalized” citizen

That statement has never been tested in court.

Here are the requirements for having citizenship conferred at birth according to U.S. law passed by Congress under Constitutional authority to define citizenship.

If you'll check your copy of the Constitution, you'll find that Congress was given the power to define uniform rules of Naturalization, not the power or authority to define citizenship, let alone who qualifies as a "natural born citizen" (Art. I, Sec. 8, along with most of the other powers of Congress). So anyone who is a "citizen at birth", strictly because of statues passed by Congress, must therefore be "naturalized at birth", which doesn't sound like the same thing as "natural born citizen". But that's my opinion, based on the actual words in the Constitution, as I say, it's not been tested in Court.

The part of your list that was different in 1961: (from the State Department

For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen are required for physical presence in the U.S. to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.

[DMZFrank]

Hussein’s claimed pop was NEVER a US citzen.

[El Gato]

“Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)”

But in 1961 that was 10 years, 5 of which had to be after the US citizen parent's 14th birthday. IOW, they needed to be 19. Obamas mother was 18, so if he was born outside the US, he was not a citizen at birth, and therefore cannot be a natural born citizen, since that is at least a necessary condition. If that were the case, and he was never naturalized, he wouldn't be a citizen at all.

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

His great grandfather was born in Ireland, and Ireland has a law similar to Italy’s.

[nufsed]

We really don't want to open the records and know the truth because it will eliminbate half of the threads here.

Good night!

[DMZFrank]

The statute law on citizenship ONLY considered parents. grand paremts are not mentioned in the statute. Consider what the founding generation and subsequent writers said....

In the official copies of the THIRD U.S. Congress (1795) margin notes state “Former act repealed. 1790. ch. 3.” referencing the FIRST U.S. Congress (1790).

Document ONE: the actual text of the THIRD CONGRESS in 1795 states,
“...children of citizens [plural, i.e. two parents] of the United States...shall be considered citizens of the United States; Provided That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons, whose fathers have never been resident in the United States...” (THIRD CONGRESS Sess. II. Ch.21. 1795, Approved January 29, 1795, pp. 414-415. Document margin note: “How children shall obtain citizenship through their parents” Document margin note: “Former Act repealed 1790 ch.3.”) See Attachment A.

Document TWO: the actual text of the FIRST CONGRESS in 1790 states,
“...children of citizens (NB: plural, i.e. two parents) of the United States...shall be considered as natural born citizens of the United States; Provided That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons, whose fathers have never been resident in the United States...” (FIRST CONGRESS Sess. II Ch.4 1790, Approved March 26, 1790, pp. 103-104. Document margin note: “Their children residing here, deemed citizens.” Document margin note: “Also, children of citizens born beyond sea, & c. Exceptions.”) See Attachment B.

Document THREE: the actual text of the Constitution from the Continental Congress and the Constitutional Convention, 1774-1789, and subsequent official printings, of the Constitution of the United States of American: Article II Section 1 Clause 5 states,
“No person, except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States
at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President…” See Attachment C.

Document FOUR: the actual text in a letter, dated January 26, 2009, was issued by United States Senator Mark R. Warner. Senator Warner fails to address any laws identifying a natural born citizen. Instead Senator Warner solely addresses a law identifying a citizen; avoiding the legal term “natural born citizen” as so stated under current Constitutional/Congress laws,
“…the Immigration and Nationality Act (P.L. 82-414) …states that
‘…A person born...after April 30, 1900 is a CITIZEN (emphasis added)
of the United States at birth.....’” See Attachment D

Source

[El Gato]

This is the section most ‘birthers’ cling to, based upon the assumption that he was not born in Hawaii, but in Kenya; and because his mother was not yet 21

It was 19, although the real requirement was 5 years residence in the US after the 14th birthday and 10 years total time.

It's now two years and 5 years. Thus someone, could be born in the US of alien parents, be a citizen of the US, return to the parents' home country before the age of 14, and live there until she in turn had a child. That child would not be a US citizen at birth.

Secondly, it would not have to be Kenya, anywhere outside the US would have the same result.

[classical artist]

Yes I have read this & it does not say NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.
This needs to be be cleared up by SCOTUS & I believe eventually they will hear a case. I believe IMHO that they are waiting for the right time & the right case. “Let Right be done” Winslow Boy

[Crystal Cove]

Thank you. Yes, notwithstanding the fact that my sister was born in Denmark, she is, and always has been, a natural born US citizen.

[BonRad]

Yeah I stopped too listening to “Old Ed”. Had enough. I hold your impression of Pidgeon being primarily onto the 1981 use of passport and can only hope. My stopping w/ PR/EH was very close to those exchanges.

As to military, so very hard to suss but I did pick up (will look if someone really insists, and it’d still be a chore, but one was there somewhere) a poll of active military on ‘gays-in-military’ and O’s presumed inviting / outing the Hershey Highwaymen that had it ten percent would leave with another 25 percent ah, uncomfortable. These numbers make sense to me as minimums.

That same ten percent MUST be rock-ribbed conservatives who’ve been exposed to a healthy dose of O-is-Usurper. Thus I make the rational guess that they would actually welcome the opportunity to leave under the single reason they can openly (enough) agree on: homosexuals in. The muffled talk HAS to be there on both subjects: leaving because of the sodomites and their hero’s ineligibility.

The shills are listening to their own. It’s fairly easy to find that, as I recall off top of head, another ten percent have been accepted off the streets as known gang members. They’d like their Bammy and I’d guess another 25 percent are so PC’d up they’d be doing the ‘favorable’ thing, especially the Wiccan lesbians and some other females getting way-much ah, male attention…and those playboys who could care less about anything except getting shot. The military might appear to be in tatters, but I’m sure if one divided it roughly into thirds as I’ve done, the middle third would not be bidding Bush goodbye without great regrets. I’m under impression there is a sizeable percentage that resents the service contractors (Blackwater) but they’re probably just carping as one branch does another. Some percent of them might shoot their mouth(s) off they have chance to give an opinion out going back home, as they’d welcome a downsizing to get rid of Blackwater, but if push came to shove they’d favor the departed Chief over the incoming quasi-Muslim madman. I’m not an avid student of these things nor know actives in the theatres. I just try to stay aware via internet and talk-radio. One also gets hints of voting patterns this way, could try to trace latest numbers if I had to, if they’re available (who knows given this past “election”). I’m talking rank-and-file too. I doubt the esteemed Gen. Petraeus had any time to neuter (tee-hee) the Clintonite brass, but who in their right mind would seriously listen to Clinton-appointed upper-levels in a pole on homosexuality?

I think its safe to say two-thirds easy (probably approaching three-quarters) of active rank-and-file military is regretful that O is ‘on the job’. They can’t “say” it, as we all know. They have to do the donkey nod.

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

The statute law on citizenship ONLY considered parents. grand paremts are not mentioned in the statute.

Really? Because you just got done telling me that because my great grandfather was born in Italy, I'm not a natural born citizen.

[Red Steel]

From your link:

The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth: (a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;

Here is what Senator Howard who was a key writer to the 14th Amendment of the Constitution explaining the meaning and intent of the words "subject to the jurisdiction therof"

I'll repeat what the Senator said over 140 years ago:

"This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens,...."

[Red Steel]

A better highlighted copy:

[mlo]

"You say tomatoe and i say tomahto. All this argument is why we need a formal adjudication for Hussein’s case."

People on the internet misunderstanding the law does not create a need for formal adjudication. A natural born citizen is a citizen by birth. There is no law making it anything else.

Lynch v. Clarke, 3 N.Y.Leg.Obs. 236, 1 Sand. Ch. 583 (1844)

"Upon principle, therefore, I can entertain no doubt, but that by the law of the United States, every person born within the dominions and allegiance of the United States, whatever were the situation of his parents, is a natural born citizen."

"His proferred COLB is clearly fraudulent,..."

It is not clearly fraudulent.

To verify we did indeed have the correct document, we contacted the Hawaii Department of Health, which maintains such records.

"It's a valid Hawaii state birth certificate," spokesman Janice Okubo said June 13, 2008, after we e-mailed her our copy.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jun/13/obamas-birth-certificate/

"I have documented a list of 158 lies that he told on the campaign trail that are at variance with the factual record, and that he surely must have known were."

Of course he's a liar. There's no doubt about that. But that's not the issue. Can you prove the liar is legally ineligible to be President?

[mlo]

You dodged it. You lack understanding.

[mlo]

"But, in the situation in question, there is evidence, but not yet proof."

Thank you for admitting that. It's like pulling teeth around here.

The deal is there are certain people already convinced that he is not eligible in fact. They are talking about what's going to happen when the truth comes out. I'm asking those people for the basis for their belief.

[mlo]

"This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens,...."

The ENTIRE sentence is operative. You cut the rest off.

[DMZFrank]

“Then there’s the sheer impluasibility that a pregnant American college girl would travel to Kenya in 1961”.

I’ll give you implausibility. Here we have an event, the election of the first black president of United States, allegedly born in Hawaii, a state of the Union, and not one single living human being has come forward and claimed they were present at this most historic birth. 1961 is not that distant in time so that a nurse, Dr., or midwife (even if they were in their mid-thirties they would likely be alive or had relatives whom they had spoken to) in a hospital where Hussein was born would not have remembered a mixed race baby born to an extremely young mother who became POTUS. They would certainly come forward to claim their place in history, and wouldn’t somebody on Hussein’s staff seek them out for a photo opportunity. Unless of course it never happened on United States soil.

The only people claiming to be present at Hussein’s birth live in Kenya, and claim he was born there. One of them is his paternal grandmother

[Red Steel]

mlo, you are full of nonsense for all to see.