They have never officially labeled me a vexatious requester. And actually that part of the law never passed. Now it just says that they can ignore duplicate requests. This is not a duplicate request; in fact, they refuse to even show me ANY request that I made for the 1961 computer-generated birth index. lol. They’re denying a request they won’t admit I ever even made (even though they sent back the money I sent with the request) - denying it because I supposedly took too long to decide to make it. lol
BT, how could there conceivably be a successful lawsuit - even by Obama’s thugs - just because some clerk properly filled out a request for index data, which is a required disclosure?
How the heck can index data be cause for a lawsuit, when it is a required disclosure? The way they have treated index data - for crying out loud, INDEX DATA - reveals that this special treatment is not just about lawsuits, although I have no doubts that Obama’s people have scared the skitters out of that department with threats of lawsuits. Their protectiveness over mere index data reveals that they’re afraid of something besides lawsuits - something that would be revealed by INDEX DATA - the most basic public information regarding what records they have in that office!
And they treat EVERY request that way so it’s not about vexatious requests either.
Why are they treating requests for routine disclosures like index data - which they say is publicly available in their office any time - as if it’s something from Area 51 (or wherever that is. I haven’t been briefed on that. lol)?
I didn’t know you weren’t officially labeled as a vexatious requestor. I was under the impression that was the case. Still, they’re probably avoiding birther requests because it’s generally been overwhelming for them to respond.
As you said, they’re protecting all index data not just Obama’s. That’s important and revealing.
Hawaii has had trouble with their immigration law for decades. The laws regarding who is a citizen and who is not a citizen where Hawaii is concerned have been written and re-written many times. The State Department has much trouble with Hawaii natives.
As Danae has pointed out, Hawaii gets federal money based on the number of citizens it has. So it has always been in Hawaii’s interest to manipulate the system for more federal money. Immigration law has an effect on who gains citizenship. The number of times the laws for Hawaii have been changed reflects the fact that problems or inconsistencies exist and that the State Department has tried to address those problems.
If Hawaii were to regularly and easily disclose index data for those early years, when the immigration law was not well-settled, it could reveal the inherent immigration problems with their citizens. Having the data printed out and accessible to the public is one thing. It’s difficult for the public to go in and photograph an entire binder of five years’ worth of index data. But if it’s in electronic form, one can do just about anything with it - like research immigration problems. That would open Hawaii up to lawsuits.
It’s not necessarily a risk of a lawsuit from the public that they’re avoiding where the lowly clerk is concerned. It’s likely the potential consequences of having a clerk reveal data that they’re charged with keeping private. Those consequences could be legal and political.