[Sibre Fan]

If Taitz has a document (or if the hoaxster gave a document to anyone), then this law may apply. But a PHOTO of a document is not an identification document and so, if all the guy did was take a photo and send a photo to Orly, then this law does not apply.

Or, I should say, I don’t see how this law would apply.

[SirJohnBarleycorn]

If the forger produced a forged identity document consisting of a birth certificate purportedly issued by a foreign government, then sent a copy of the document (whether a scan or a photograph, doesn’t matter) by electronic means or in the mails, the section will apply. Even merely “possessing” the document in a way that affects “interstate commerce” brings the activity within federal law.

[Beloved Levinite]

Yes it does. Electronic tranfers could include an electronic photo of the doc. Also, Orly stated she said has a color copy of the doc.

"including the transfer of a document by electronic means"

[dalight]

Or, I should say, I don’t see how this law would apply.

Because, the photo is evidence that the document was produced, that is sufficient.

[jurroppi1]

wouldn’t the copy have been made, then photographed and either electronically transmitted or mailed? even if it was scanned, or generated in photoshop or some other image editing/graphics software, it was still made in one of those forms and transmitted somehow.

That to me seems to fit the bill, but I’m not a lawyer - I just have read an awful lot of legal garbage, so my brain may be stew as it is...