It still hasn’t been officially established where Obama was born. Hawaiian officials are either misspeaking or lying. This needs to be settled in court.
The Supreme Court has already rejected hearing any of nine attempts to have them settle the issue. Two more appeals will reach the US Supreme Court over the next several weeks:
Hollister v Soetoro and Rhodes v MacDonald.
There have now been 89 different attempts to challenge Obama’s eligibility in state and federal courts, none of them have succeeded.
One federal judge (appointed by George W. Bush) put it this way: “The Court observes that the President defeated seven opponents in a grueling primary campaign for his party’s nomination that lasted more than eighteen months and cost those opponents well over $300 million. Then the President faced a formidible opponent in the general election who received $84 million to conduct his general election campaign against the President.
It would appear that ample opportunity existed for discovery of evidence that would support any contention that the President was not eligible for the office he sought.
Furthermore, Congress is apparently satisfied that the President is qualified to serve. Congress has not initiated impeachment proceedings, and in fact, the House of Representatives in a broad bipartisan manner has rejected the suggestion that the President is not eligible for office (see H.R. Res. 593, 111th Congress(2009) commemorating, by a vote of 378-0 the 50th Anniversary of Hawai’i statehood and stating “the 44th President of the United States was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961.”)
“A spurious claim questioning the President’s constitutional legitimacy may be protected by the First Amendment, but a Court’s placement of its imprimatur upon a claim that is so lacking in factual support that it is frivolous would undoubtedly disserve the public interest.”—US District Court Judge for the Middle District of Georgia, Clay R. Land, “Rhodes v MacDonald” September 16, 2009