Sincerely wish Mr. Allen the best of luck. Now let me play devil’s advocate.
Why do these people continue to insist as attorney Orion advised Malihi, and as Allen does in this complaint that, “It doesn’t matter where he was born. It never did.” What is possibly gained by that stipulation?
We all know there are two issue, birthplsce and citizen parents. At this time, birthplace is a state issue and the other is a federal issue.
From the complaint at page 3, line 4:
“10. 42 U.S.C. 1988 permits a State’s Common law to decide a court case if there is no adequate Federal remedy.”
California’s Supreme Court, IIRC correctly, did indeed hold there was a federal remedy to the state action before it, and pointed to the Joint Session of Congress, a session specifically called for the sole purpose of certify the election results.
The two-parent issue is a federal issue because it concerns a yet to be rendered interpretation of the Consitution. As attorney Orion also told Malihi, the issue has not yet been resolved judicially. If true, and I believe it is, then a state is not going to touch the two-parent federal issue.
Perhaps the best case result at the state level is that we find a state court that will render a clear ruling on the necessity of a candidate producing certified copies of birth documents to the requesting state.
We need a plaintiff who recognizes that birthplace is an inseparable part of NBC, and who will seek in his complaint a ruling that in order to avoid fraud, it is incumbent upon a state to require the candidates it will send to D.C. to satisfy the birthplace element. How plain and simple is that?
I have long advocated this strategy because I have my suspicions that Barack Hussein Obama can very not likely satisfy even 14th amendment requirements.
One does not play such games with the issue of their birth certificate unless something is not as it should be.