Birthers' day in court

[Donb123]

(01-30-2012 11:30 AM)lucrezaborgia Wrote:  Again, as to the rest of your argument...congratulations, you've probably described half the presidents of the US.

Excellent. Nobody that knows my positions never mistook me for a Republicrat. They're both scoundrels.

[Donb123]

So the judge in this case ruled, using Indiana case law and not SCOTUS precedent, that Obama is a natural born citizen and will not be recommending to GA Sec. of State to prohibit him from being on the ballot.

[myotch]

It's a good ruling, methinks. If it is bad, it will go to the Supremes.

In all seriousness, if this is a major coverup, the guard will go down after Obama's presidency. Both the importance and urgency in protecting him will be lost. Legacies have a way of bringing out facts that are unavailable at previous times.

[Donb123]

(02-04-2012 12:06 AM)myotch Wrote:  It's a good ruling, methinks. If it is bad, it will go to the Supremes.

In all seriousness, if this is a major coverup, the guard will go down after Obama's presidency. Both the importance and urgency in protecting him will be lost. Legacies have a way of bringing out facts that are unavailable at previous times.

No. It's going to be appealed but I don't think it can go to SCOTUS as it was a state court using state law.

What I found interesting in reading about all this was that by law "natural born citizen" may not be construed the same was as "citizen" or "born citizen" because the 14th ammendment already defined a born citizen and a naturalized citizen. The additional word "natural" would be superfluous if understood in the exact same manner. The judge in this case did not find the argument using prior SCOTUS precedent to be compelling.

The other interesting thing was the thought Orly's stuff was terrible. None of her "experts" were validated as any kind of expert so he basically ignored everything they had to say. This is quite frankly why the other two plaintiffs wanted their cases severed from hers.

[dramaturge]

Link to the filed decision:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/80417613/Farra...e-2-3-2012

[Ricardo]

I have no doubt they are going to TRY to appeal. But it is going to be an uphill battle to justify why it should be reviewed.

On what grounds? The court looked at the evidence presented by the Plaintiffs, it did not meet even the minimum requirements of evidence.

It seems as though nobody is questioning the fact that Obama was born in the US. The question is whether someone born in the US of an American mother and a Non-American father qualifies. The plaintiffs had nothing to further their case in this respect. The court saw the arguments regarding a photoshop'd birth certificate as bogus, as well as the false social security number issue.