Many lawsuits and voting, based on conspiracy theories related to Barack Obama's eligibility for the United States presidency, have been filed since 2008. This action has requested that Obama be disqualified from running for, or confirmed for, the Presidency of the United States. , to declare his actions in the office to be null and void, or to force him to release additional documentation related to his US citizenship.
Video Barack Obama presidential eligibility litigation
Challenges
In early 2012, dozens of lawsuits have been raised challenging Obama's eligibility in countries including North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Hawaii, Connecticut, New Jersey, Texas and Washington. There are no claims or challenges that result in any granting of assistance to the claimant by a court or other entity.
Maps Barack Obama presidential eligibility litigation
Obstacle
The main obstacle to most citizens' demands is the lack of standing. In the initial wave of lawsuits challenging the validity of the 2008 presidential election, the only plaintiff who is a presidential or presidential election candidate is Alan Keyes. The importance of standing doctrine is explained by Judge R. Barclay Surrick of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in rejecting a lawsuit. He notes that one of the main goals of the doctrine is to prevent the courts from deciding the question "where the danger is too vague." This is especially true for presidential elections, where disgruntled voters who do not suffer individual losses "will make us frustrate the democratic process by canceling the chosen candidates of millions of people and undergoing excessive examination during what is one of the most contested primary presidencies in memory live. "
Long shape
On April 27, 2011, Obama released a birth certificate of Hawaii's original long form. Donald Trump took credit for the release of Obama's birth certificate, but at the same time questioned its authenticity.
Civil settings
Federal
Berg v. Obama
On August 21, 2008, Pennsylvania lawyer Philip J. Berg, a Democrat and former state attorney general, filed a complaint stating that Obama was born in Kenya, not Hawaii, and therefore a Kenyan or possibly Indonesian citizen, where he lives as a child. He alleges that the "Direct Birth Certification" on Obama's website is counterfeiting. US District Judge R. Barclay Surrick dismissed the complaint in October 2008, finding that Berg had no position to take the case and that his attempts to stand up to pursue his claim were "reckless and unfit for discussion."
Passing the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, Berg petitioned for a certiorari decree before a decision in the United States Supreme Court. On December 10, 2008, the Supreme Court rejected Berg's request for an order against Electoral College seat, scheduled for December 15th. On December 15, 2008, the applicant applied for the order. Two days later, Berg's appeal was rejected without comment by Chief Justice Anthony Kennedy. The previously rejected Berg application for an order was again referred to Justice Antonin Scalia on December 18, 2008. On January 12, the Supreme Court rejected an appeal for certiorari. Applications to remain addressed to Judge Scalia and referred to the Court were also rejected on January 21, 2009.
On 12 November 2009, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed the decision of the district court that Berg has no position.
Essek v. Obama
On November 25, 2008, Daniel John Essek of Whitley County, Kentucky filed a federal lawsuit in Kentucky Eastern District Court. The lawsuit was initially filed as a case of the Freedom of Information Act, but was turned into a judicial challenge for Obama's qualification for the Office of the President of the United States. Essek is trying to prevent Barack Obama's inauguration on the grounds that Obama is not a natural-born citizen based on allegations that Obama was born in Kenya. District Judge Gregory F. Van Tatenhove dismissed the lawsuit for lack of material jurisdiction, stating that Mr Essek's complaint was a common complaint of a voter, not a special injury that would grant him the right to sue.
Kerchner v. Obama
On January 20, 2009, Attorney Mario Apuzzo filed a lawsuit in federal court, on behalf of Charles Kerchner and other plaintiffs, suing President-Elect Barack Obama, US Congressman Dick Cheney and Nancy Pelosi who accused Obama of not qualifying for president. , and that Congress failed to verify Obama's eligibility. A federal district court in New Jersey dismissed the lawsuit, stating that the plaintiff had no standing. On July 3, 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, citing Berg v. Obama, confirmed his dismissal, and ordered Apuzzo to show why he should not be penalized for initiating a nonessential act. interesting. Apuzzo's next request for trial was rejected, but the order to show the cause was exhausted. On November 29, 2010, the US Supreme Court declined, without comment, to listen to the case.
Barnett v. Obama
On January 20, 2009, Orly Taitz filed a lawsuit in federal court, Alan Keyes et al. Barack H. Obama et al against Obama, with Wiley Drake as one of the parties named for the plaintiff. On July 13, 2009, the Chief Judge rejected the case without prejudice on a technical basis, and on July 14, 2009, Taitz filled in "The First Amended Complaint" Captain Pamela Barnett v. Barack Hussein Obama on behalf of Alan Keyes, Wiley Drake, Cynthia Davis, Gail Lightfoot, some other local politicians, and various members of the armed services. Taitz sought a declarative decision that Obama was not eligible for positions and orders to cancel his actions and his appointment as President.
Two of the plaintiffs, Markham Robinson and Drake, then attempted to dismiss their lawyer, Orly Taitz, who refused to sign their substitution-of-law documents and instead filed to dismiss them both as plaintiffs in this case. On September 8, 2009, Judge David O. Carter dismissed the dismissal of Drake and Robinson as plaintiffs, and granted their plea to replace Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation as their advice, refusing to fire Judge Arthur Nakazato from the case. , and set a temporary trial date for January 26, 2010.
At the hearing on October 5, 2009, Carter considered Motion of the Accused to Terminate and refused to rule from the bench, saying that he would take the matter under the advisor. On October 7, 2009, he released a Minute Order that completed the previous tentative dates for the assessment and trial movement, and on October 29, 2009, he rejected the case. On December 22, 2011, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit confirmed the dismissal, stating that the plaintiff had not enough to challenge the eligibility of the sitting president. On June 11, 2012, the US Supreme Court rejected, without comment, to listen to the case.
Citing new evidence, on August 14, 2012, Taitz filed a motion to Court of Justice Carter to reopen the case. The motion was rejected on 31 August 2012.
Hollister v. Soetoro
On March 5, 2009, a lawsuit filed by Philip Berg on behalf of Gregory S. Hollister, a retired Air Force colonel, against Barack Obama (referenced as "Barry Soetoro", the name given at the time of enrollment in Indonesian primary school). The suit was dismissed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Chief judge James Robertson said the case was a waste of court time, calling on Berg and other lawyers "provocateur agents" and their local lawyer, John Hemenway, "a pedestrian soldier in their crusade." He ordered Hemenway to show the reason why he did not have to pay legal fees to Obama's lawyer as a punishment for filing a complaint "for improper purposes such as for harassment". The district court finally admonished Hemenway for his actions, and the US Court of Appeals for the Circuit District of Columbia confirmed the dismissal of Hemenway's case and reprimand. On January 18, 2011, the US Supreme Court declined, without comment, to listen to the case.
Cook v. Good
On February 1, 2009, Stefan F. Cook, a major in the United States Army Reserve, contacted Taitz via e-mail, requesting to be part of his lawsuit. On May 8, he volunteered to serve for a year in Afghanistan beginning on July 15, 2009. The Army accepted his offer and ordered him to report the date. On July 8, he filed a lawsuit, with Taitz as his lawyer, seeking a temporary restraining order and status as a repudiant of conscience, arguing that his dispatch order was invalid because Obama was not a natural born-natured US citizen and therefore not qualified to serve as commander of the armed forces. The commands are then revoked; an army spokesman stated, "A reserve soldier who volunteers for active duty tours may request a retraction of orders until the day he is scheduled to report for active duty." Thus, Cook's case was dismissed for debate on July 16.
In the lawsuit, it is written Stefan Friedick Cook v. Wanda L. Good (Colonel Wanda L. Good -Commander, US Army Human Resources Command - St. Louis) and submitted to the United States District Court for the Central District of Georgia, Cook confirmed. that he "will act in violation of international law by engaging in military action outside the United States under the command of this President...... simultaneously subjugating himself to the possibility of prosecution as a war criminal by the execution of these duties faithfully." In April, before Cook volunteered to be stationed in Afghanistan, he was included on the Taitz list of people he said he represented as a plaintiff, in a letter addressing citizenship. An Army retired general and an active US Air Force colonel, then joined the Georgian case as a plaintiff with Cook. Cook's placement order was canceled, and a government spokesman explained, "General Commander of SOCCENT has decided that he does not want Major Cook's services, and has revoked his deployment order." An army spokesman dismissed a false claim that the retraction validated Cook's claim: "This does not validate the strange claims made by Major Cook or his lawyer.The idea that this validates the charge of the president's fitness for office is simply False."
After the case was filed, Taitz alleged that Cook had been fired from his civilian job with a defense contractor, after the situation at his company became "insane and crazy".
Cook received significant media coverage on July 16, 2009, from Sean Hannity of Fox News.
After the lawsuit was reported at Columbus Ledger-Enquirer, the newspaper reported receiving "the highest traffic volume ever by a single story in the history of ledger-enquirer.com, including a written threat against the newspaper", with nearly half million new readers and hundreds of e-mails. Such threats encourage increased security around the courthouse where Cook cases are heard, as well as precautions taken to protect newspaper report authors of the case. Executive Editor Ben Holden noted: "The conversation feels like the right reason - almost a religious reason - because some people hate this president."
Rhodes v. Macdonald
In September 2009, Taitz filed Rhodes v. MacDonald (Colonel Thomas MacDonald - garrison commander Fort Benning, Georgia) on behalf of Captain Connie Rhodes, a US Army physician, sought an arrest warrant to halt the upcoming Rhodes launch into Iraq. In a request for an arrest warrant, Taitz argued that the order was illegal because Obama illegally served as President. On September 16, federal judge Clay D. Land (the same judge who hears Cook v. Good) rejects the motion and denounces it haphazardly.
Within hours of Land's decision, Taitz told the news website Memo Points Speaks that he felt Land's refusal to hear his case was a betrayal act. Two days later, he filed a motion to defend the deployment of Rhodes while awaiting rehearing of the dismissal orders. He repeated his treason charges against Land and made some other unforgiving statements, including claims that Land helped and abetted as Obama's "dictatorship" aspiration. The land refused the motion was reckless and ordered it to show the reason why he should not be fined $ 10,000 due to misuse of the judicial process.
Hours later, a letter containing the signature of Rhodes arrives, stating that Taitz filed a motion without his knowledge or consent, requested Land to issue Taitz as a prosecutor in the case, stating that it was "a plan to file a complaint with California State Bar for acts [Taitz] deplorable and unprofessional. "On September 26, 2009, Taitz filed a motion to a court that tried to resign as adviser to Rhodes, so he could divulge in court" privileged client-law communications "since Rhodes Rhodes > "now a quasi-criminal prosecution of the undersigned lawyer below, for the purpose of punishment."
On October 13, 2009, Judge Clay Land ordered "Counsel Orly Taitz... to pay $ 20,000 to the United States, through the Central District of Georgia Police Station, within thirty days from the date of this Order as a sanction for his violation in violation of Rule 11 of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. "Land's decree states:
The court found that the attorney's behavior was deliberate and not merely negligent. It shows bad faith on his part. As a lawyer, he is considered to know better. He has an obligation to follow the rules and respect the Court. Counsel's behavior patterns convincingly determined that he was not wrongly violating the law. He consciously violated Rule 11. His response to court appearances caused order to dazzle in his arrogance and bordered on delusions. He does not express remorse or remorse for his mistakes. Instead, he continued his baseless assault on the Court.
After knowing Land's decision, Taitz said he would appeal, stating that Judge Land "feared against the regime" of the Obama administration was "oppressive", and that sanctions were an attempt to "intimidate" him. On March 15, 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed sanctions against Taitz. On August 9, 2010, the federal government filed an abstract judgment, a document that placed a $ 20,000 lien plus interest on all its original properties, prompting Taitz to say, "I will pay the money, and I will keep fighting." On January 10, 2011 , The US Supreme Court declined, without comment, to listen to the case.
Taitz v. Obama
On January 27, 2010, Taitz, in propria persona , filed a petition for a warrio quo warrant. On April 14, 2010, US District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth canceled the petition; and, touched on the novel Don Quixote , he wrote, "The court does not want to go to the windmill with him."
Taitz v. Astrue
In February 2011, Taitz filed, in the propria persona , a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the Social Security Administration, stating that the agency improperly refused to disclose his information about Obama's social security number. After Taitz repeatedly failed to follow court rules regarding the redaction of the social security number in court filings, Chief Justice Lamberth wrote that Taitz "played around the Court or displayed his own folly... There is no logical explanation he can give as to why he now wastes Court time , as well as staff time, with this incorrect editorial. "On August 30, 2011, the court gave a summary verdict in favor of the government, writing" When much of its influence in the Court shows, the plaintiff will not cease to get to the grounds of this alleged conspiracy. plaintiff, today is not his lucky day. "
Taitz v. Ruemmler
Taitz attempted to force White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler under FOIA to grant access to Obama's "long form" birth certificate. On October 17, 2011, Chief Justice Lamberth recorded "Sisyphean quest" Taitz and canceled the suit.
Archibald v. US Department of Justice
In November 2011, George Archibald filed a FOIA lawsuit seeking "information about the birth of Obama in 1961, family background, citizenship, residence, immigration, expatriate/repatriation, and other matters relating to Obama's origin and nationality generated during the 2008 FBI investigation of the presidential candidate. "
Sibley v. Obama
Montgomery Blair Sibley, a dismissed lawyer who once represented Deborah Jeane Palfrey ( "DC Madam"), sued Obama in January 2012, alleging that he was not a native citizen and that his birth certificate was a forgery. A federal judge dismissed Sibley's suit on June 6, 2012. In March 2012, Sibley also filed his lawsuit with the US Supreme Court, stating that the district court has been "too slow" in considering the case. Status
Martin v. Lingle
On October 17, 2008, a lawsuit was filed in the state court of the state of Hawaii by Andy Martin, previously stated by the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit to become a "lurking and vengeful litigator who has long abused the American legal system", and who used the demands law as "a cruel and effective weapon against his enemies".
Martin's lawsuit seeks to order the country to release a copy of the long-term birth certificate of Senator Obama. The short birth certificate posted on Obama's online campaign declared his birthplace as Honolulu, Hawaii. Martin's lawsuit claims that because Martin "sought for factual accuracy and efforts to undertake thorough research", he must have a copy of Obama's birth certificate from the state and not a "posted on the website" certificate. Under Hawaiian law only persons associated with records, or spouses, parents, descendents or persons of the same ancestor, or persons acting on behalf of such persons may obtain copies of important records.
The court rejected Martin's petition, saying that Martin had no "direct and tangible interest in the record". The court cited the lack of Martin's legal position to obtain another person's birth certificate.
Donofrio v. Wells
In October 2008, Leo Donofrio, a lawyer from New Jersey, filed a lawsuit against Nina Mitchell Wells, New Jersey State Secretary, to challenge Obama's eligibility, Republican presidential nominee John McCain (see details here) and Socialist Workers Party candidate Roger Calero. Donofrio asserted that the three candidates did not qualify: Obama for having dual US and British nationality at birth (the last through Obama's father), McCain since being born in the Panama Canal Zone, and Calero for allegedly possessing Nicaraguan citizenship.
Donofrio is not among those who claim Obama may be born outside of Hawaii. Also, Donofrio does not oppose the fact that Obama is a US citizen and instead only challenges whether Obama is a natural born citizen.
The case was referred to the Supreme Court by Judge Clarence Thomas. When the case reached the United States Supreme Court on December 8, 2008, the Court refused without comment to hear it.
Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz
On October 31, 2008, Greenwich residents and healthcare store owner Cort Wrotnowski filed a lawsuit in Connecticut Supreme Court against the then Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz challenging the authenticity of a Hawaii Hawaii birthday candidate. The lawsuit was dismissed after the initial trial.
Wrotnowski appealed to the US Supreme Court on Nov. 25, stating that British citizenship of Obama's father made the elected president ineligible to take office. Leo Donofrio, whose previous case against Obama's eligibility has been rejected, aided by Supreme Court appeal Wrotnowski. The request to stay or order was rejected without comment on December 15, 2008. Thomas Goldstein, who has raised many cases before the court and covers the cases of the Supreme Court, commented that "The law is always understood, if you were born here, you are a citizen born naturally, and that's especially true in this case, when you have a parent of a US citizen like Barack Obama's mother. "
Keyes v. Bowen
On November 14, 2008, Alan Keyes and Markham Robinson, chairman of the American Independent Party and California candidate for presidential election, filed a lawsuit calling for Obama to provide documentation that he is a US-born citizen. Keyes also said in an interview that he would not support the amendments to this Constitution requirement. Keyes asserted that the statement of the ancestors of Obama's father "raises doubts whether Barack Obama is actually a US citizen born naturally, qualifies to become president."
California Superior Court Judge Michael P. Kenny endorses, relentlessly to amend, Minister Bowen and Obama, who demonstrate the Keyes' petition to write a mandate and allow Obama's actions to cancel the summons. Keyes was found not to be entitled to the records he was looking for, thereby declaring the case contested. The California Court of Appeal affirmed the dismissal on October 25, 2010. The California Supreme Court rejected, without comment, to review the case on 2 February 2011. On October 3, 2011, the US Supreme Court rejected, without comment, to hear the case.
Ankeny v. Indiana State Governor
In December 2008, Steve Ankeny and Bill Kruse filed an "Petition for Extremely Precious Emissions Prevention" against the Governor of Indiana to block "any popular vote for Barack Obama and Joe Biden for appointment as Chief Elector [sic]." A hearing was held, and on March 16, 2009, the Governor's movement to dismiss was granted. The Plaintiffs appealed the verdict to the Indiana Appeals Court, which upheld it on 12 November 2009.
The appeal decision addressed the question of whether Obama's eligibility was influenced by his father's lack of US citizenship, saying that "[b] ased in the language of Article II, Part 1, Verse 4 and guidance given by Wong Kim Ark , we conclude people born on the borders of the United States are 'natural born citizens' for Article II, Part 1 objectives, regardless of the nationality of their parents. "On April 1, 2010, the Supreme Court of Indiana refused, without comment, a request to consider the case.
Taitz v. Fuddy
In August 2011, Taitz filed, in propria persona , a lawsuit against the Hawaii Department of Health director, seeking to review Obama's "long form" birth certificate. On October 12, 2011, the Hawaii Circuit Court rejected Taitz's lawsuit.
2012 selection
primary 2012 challenge
On April 24, 2012, Obama got quite a lot of delegates to ensure the Democratic candidacy for re-election.
Alabama
The lawsuit filed by Albert Hendershot in December 2011 alleged the birth certificate Obama forged and that he is not eligible to be in the main vote of Alabama. On January 9, 2012, Hendershot's lawsuit was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, and two similar claims were filed by Harold Sorensen and another Alabama resident from Pell City. Sorensen asked Judge Helen Shores Lee, who is black and also leads Hendershot's lawsuit, to resign because "he has a racial bias and a lack of constitutional knowledge." Jas Pell City was dismissed on January 13, 2012. Sorenson's demands were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction on January 17, 2012, and the court awarded the Democrats the fees and charges; However, his lawyer promised not to raise money from Sorenson as long as he refrained from "committing the court and this decision."
Alaska
Gordon Epperly objected to Obama's placement in the voting, writes, "Since Barack Hussein Obama II is a 'mulatto' race, his citizenship status is based on the Fourteenth Amendment of the US Constitution.As the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, the 'Negro' race 'mulatto' has no position to be a US citizen under the US Constitution. "The challenge was rejected because Alaska will not use the primary election to elect a delegate to the Democratic party.
Arizona
The lawsuit filed in Arizona high court by Kenneth Allen ( Allen v. Arizona Democrats) alleges that Obama is not a native citizen because his father "is a resident of Kenya and thus a British citizen". Allen argues that the US Supreme Court decision in Minor v. Happersett requires citizens born in US birth from two US citizen parents; however, the judge dismissed the lawsuit on March 7, 2012, which ruled that "President Obama is a citizen born under the Constitution" and that "[c] Plaintiff's statement, Minor v. Happersett otherwise. " California
Gary Kreep (one of the lawyers who filed Barnett v. Obama) filed on behalf of seven other California citizens suing demands that the California Foreign Secretary verify the eligibility of all presidential candidates before putting them on vote.
In July 2012, Taitz sued to block the certification of the primary election results, accusing "election fraud rampant"; he also accused Obama of engaging in "identity fraud." The setting was rejected. In October 2012, Taitz attempted to revive his election suit by asking the court to force Occidental College to produce student records for President Barack Obama, who attended the Occidental from 1979 to 1981. The judge ruled that Taitz's movement did not meet the basic legal requirements and ordered him to pay $ 4,000 in sanctions to Occidental lawyers for a fee against the motion. The California Court of Appeal affirms dismissal and sanctions.
Florida
Two lawsuits filed in state courts, including one filed by Larry Klayman, tried to keep Obama from being eligible. Joe Arpaio, the sheriff for Maricopa County, Arizona, filed to support Klayman's suit, a written statement stating "there is a possible cause that [Obama's birth certificate] is counterfeiting." Klayman also sent Arpaio the summoner who directed him to appear in the Florida courtroom. The lawsuit filed by Klayman was dismissed on June 29, 2012.
Georgia
Some Georgians (Carl Swensson and another Georgian were represented by Georgian state representative Mark Hatfield, a Georgian represented by Taitz, and a Georgian represented by Van Irion) posed a challenge with Georgian Foreign Minister Brian Kemp on Obama's inclusion in March primary vote. Kemp referred to the challenge to Deputy Chief Judge Michael Malihi, an administrative legal judge, who dismisses Obama's motion to dismiss them and schedule a hearing for January 26, 2012.
On January 23, 2012, Malihi rejected Obama's move to overturn a summons issued by Taitz to force Obama to appear, saying that Obama did not show why he should not attend the hearing or how his testimony would not help. On January 25, Obama's lawyers asked Kemp to stop the process, and indicated that Obama would no longer participate in litigation pending Kemp's decision. Kemp rejects their request and warns that their non-participation will "harm yourself".
Both Obama and his lawyer appeared at the hearing on 26 January. This will usually produce a standard order, but the challengers ask Malihi to allow them to continue the hearing and decide on "the superiority of their arguments and evidence". Taitz summoned eight witnesses (including himself), and presented seven exhibits to support his claim that Obama is not a native citizen, has used multiple names, has multiple Social Security numbers, and uses fake birth certificates. Taitz asks Malihi to find Obama in humiliation for failing to show up.
On February 3, 2012, Malihi recommends that Obama stay on the ballot. Regarding the Taitz case, Malihi writes: "The court found the testimony of witnesses, as well as the tendered exhibition, to be few, if any, probable values, and thus entirely insufficient to support the plaintiff's allegations." The Retort Drudge described the trial as, "Empty Table 1, Orly Taitz 0".
On February 6, 2012, Kemp received Malihi's recommendation. On February 13, the challengers submitted a review.
Illinois
Three challenges were raised against Obama's inclusion in Illinois voting, including one that challenged his birth certificate.
Indiana
On February 24, Taitz appeared as a witness on behalf of two Indiana residents who had filed with Indiana Election Commission a challenge to Obama's eligibility. The challengers demanded a default judgment against Obama, as both he and a representative appeared at the hearing; this movement was unanimously rejected by the commission.
Taitz argued that the president's last name was not Obama, that he was not a citizen of birth, and that he was using a stolen Social Security number. "When Taitz accuses the commission of cover-up, Dan Dumezich, Republican Merrillville who is chairman of the commission, tells him that if he is not polite once again, 'your ass will be lost.'" The challenge is rejected.
Mississippi
In February 2012, Taitz sued the Mississippi State Democratic Party and Mississippi Foreign Affairs Minister who accused Obama of not being a naturally born citizen. Taitz accused the party of helping and abetting in forgeries and frauds when handed to court a copy of Obama's birth certificate. In response, the party filed a verified verification court of the Hawaii State Registeror proving the accuracy of the birth certificate of Obama. Taitz accused the registrant of being involved with the fraud.
New Hampshire
In November 2011, Taitz, backed by four New Hampshire state legislators, filed a complaint with the State Voice Law Commission that challenged Obama's eligibility to compete in the primary vote. Because Obama has paid the filing fee and his nomination statement in accordance with state law, the Commission unanimously voted to keep Obama on the ballot. The Commission later rejected a request for review.
In response, Taitz wrote to William L. O'Brien, Chairman of the House of the New Hampshire House of Representatives, and demanded the dismissal of Bill Gardner, the New Hampshire State Secretary, for "fraudulent electoral scams, aiding and abetting fraud, forgery and possibly treason. "DJ Bettencourt, the House Majority Leader of the New Hampshire House of Representatives, wrote a letter to Taitz and called his actions "incompatible with legal political dialogue, never caring about people as silly as the constant obsession with President Obama's birthplace." Bettencourt added, "I have spoken with the Representatives present and expressed to them my strong desire that they immediately separate from you and this folly."
The aggrieved deputy then asks the New Hampshire Attorney General to investigate Obama's eligibility.
New Jersey
In April 2012, Mario Apuzzo (a lawyer who filed Kerchner v. Obama ) told the administrative judge on behalf of two New Jersey residents that Obama has not proven his identity and eligibility, and thus should not be placed on the ballot.
Responding to the Petitioner's allegation that Barack Obama did not prove his worth, Administrative Judge Jeff S. Masin stated: "There appears to be no confirmation requirement that a person who enters the nomination for the Presidency who is present to the Minister of Foreign Affairs any certification or other evidence that he meets Requirements for the Office. "Further the judge ruled on the Plaintiff's statement that Obama was not eligible for his non-citizen father:" Legal experts' legal position on this matter, but good intentions, has no reward in law. " The decision to defend Barack Obama on Primary Vote was adopted by Kimberly M. Guadagno, New Jersey State Secretary. The ruling was upheld by the New Jersey Superior Appeals Division on May 31, 2012. New Jersey Primary was held on 5 June.
Pennsylvania
A lawsuit filed by Charles Kerchner (plaintiff's leader in Kerchner v. Obama ) was dismissed on 1 March 2012, arguing that the court has jurisdiction only to hear challenges against defects in the nomination paper, which do not include questions about Obama's status as a natural born citizen. Two other lawsuits, including one filed by Philip Berg (plaintiff at Berg v. Obama ), were both dismissed.
South Dakota
In May 2012, Thomas Scheveck filed a complaint with the South Dakota Electoral Council, arguing that Obama was not a natural-born citizen because his father was not a US citizen. Scheveck quotes a Supreme Court ruling in Minor v. Happersett to support his claim that only people born to two American parents can qualify as citizens of birth. Scheck also suspects Obama has used a fake birth certificate and Social Security Number. In a unanimous decision on May 11, the election council rejected the complaint, citing a lack of jurisdiction to consider allegations of the type proposed by Scheveck.
2012 election challenge
Illinois
On September 13, 2012, a state council rejected three challenges to Obama's placement in the November vote, finding a challenge that increased the previously rejected argument and was based on "the wrong legal interpretation of what constitutes 'natural born citizens'".
Indiana
Taitz filed a lawsuit in Indiana, and attempted to summon Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio and one of his assistants, Mike Zullo, to force them to testify about the results of their investigation into Obama's birth certificate. Zullo indicated the two had no intention of attending the trial, stating, "We do not want our information tainted by a circus show".
Kansas
On September 10, 2012, Joe Montgomery presented a challenge to Obama on voting, claiming that Obama's birth certificate is a "doctor" and that he is not a citizen of birth because he does not have two US citizens. On September 14, Montgomery declared that there was "hostility and intimidation" directed against him and his "personal and professional associations," and recalled his objections. At the September 17 meeting where the challenge was withdrawn, Taitz's request to speak was rejected.
On September 20, Taitz filed a lawsuit in a state court to keep the council action. On November 2, 2012, the court overturned Taitz's suit for lack of standing.
Mississippi
In a lawsuit initiated by Taitz, he claimed Obama's birth certificate and fake Social Security Number, and attempted to disqualify him from voting.
New York
Christopher Earl Strunk sued the New York State Board of Elections and the other to prevent President Obama from appearing in the 2012 presidential vote. Strunk allegedly Obama is connected to a massive conspiracy theory involving Jesuits and others. Judge Arthur Schack said the case: "If the complaint in this act is a movie script, it will be titled 'Manchurian Candidate Meets The Da Vinci Code.'" Strunk was fined more than $ 177,000 in fees and penalties.
Court challenge
Liberty Legal Foundation v. National Democratic Party
In October 2011, the Liberty Legal Foundation filed a lawsuit in Arizona, seeking to urge the Democratic National Committee of Obama's certification as a candidate for the 2012 US presidential election on the grounds that it does not have two citizen parents and thus, he argues, is not a citizen a natural born country. The Foundation's complaint cites the decision of the US Supreme Court of 1875 at Minor v. Happersett in support of his claim that a born-born citizen is defined by the Supreme Court as "all children born in a citizen's parent country". The lawsuit was dismissed on July 11, 2012, due to "lack of jurisdiction." The defense movement for sanctions against the plaintiff's lawyer, Irion, was rejected.
A nearly identical suit with the same party was filed in Tennessee, and was dismissed for lack of standing on June 21, 2012. On August 24, the district court approved the plaintiff's lawyer, Irion, for filing a lawsuit that he "knew or reasonably should have known that the claims in this case has no legal basis ".
Tisdale v. Obama
On January 17, 2012, Charles Tisdale of Virginia filed a civil suit before the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. In the lawsuit, Tisdale alleges that Barack Obama, Mitt Romney and Ron Paul each have non-citizen parents, and should therefore be banned from November 6, 2012, the presidential vote in Virginia. An amicus report was filed to support the Plaintiff by lawyer Mario Apuzzo. District Judge John A. Gibney, Jr., dismissed the lawsuit with prejudice because the Plaintiff "did not state a claim for any assistance that may be granted." Judge Gibney explains: "It is certain that those born in the United States are considered natural born citizens." The dismissal was confirmed without comment by the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit on June 5, 2012.
Sibley v. D.C. Elections and Ethics Council
In June 2012, Sibley filed a lawsuit to force the District Electoral and Ethics Council of Columbia to respond to his challenge that Obama is not a citizen of birth and thus is not eligible to run in the 2012 elections.
Daniels v. Ohio State Secretary
In July 2012, Susan Daniels filed a lawsuit that sought to prevent Ohio's Ohio Foreign Secretary from putting Obama's name in a November 2012 vote for allegedly using a fake Social Security number.
Really v. Obama
In July 2012, Gordon Epperly sued the Election of the Alaska Division to force him to obtain Obama's birth certificate before placing it on a ballot.
House v. Obama
On August 10, 2012, Todd House, a doctor and presidential candidate, filed a lawsuit accusing Obama of being born in Kenya and not a citizen of birth. In rejecting the lawsuit, the court ruled that Congress, and not that, was empowered under the US Constitution to determine the eligibility of the president.
Beginning v. Obama
Arnold Begay, a convicted federal prisoner (in 2002) to aggravate child sexual abuse, filed a lawsuit claiming that Obama was not a native citizen and sought a court order demanding that Obama produce his DNA sample.
Paige v. Condos
H. Brooke Paige, who lost Vermont 2012 primary election to Republican nomination for the US Senate, sued Vermont's James Condos, who tried to prevent Obama's name from appearing in the vote. The lawsuit was prepared by Mario Apuzzo (lawyer for Kerchner v. Obama), but Paige represents himself in court because Apuzzo is not licensed in Vermont. On September 21, 2012, the court rejected Paige's request, ruled that "it has been presented on a basis that is not radically enough to issue a temporary order or even a preliminary court order". On November 14, 2012, the case was dismissed because Paige has no position. In October 2013, the Supreme Court of Vermont decided on Obama's re-election to appeal Paige, and canceled the case. Paige sought a review in the United States Supreme Court.
McInnish v. Bennett
In November 2012, the presidential candidate for the Constitution Party and members of the Alabama Republican party, represented by Larry Klayman, accused the Alabama State Secretary of having an obligation to investigate Obama's eligibility. The trial court dismissed the complaint, and the Alabama Supreme Court confirmed the dismissal. Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore and other judges disagreed, arguing that the Minister of Foreign Affairs did indeed have the authority to conduct such an investigation. Two other judges wrote concrete opinions that supported dismissal and conveyed different opinions.
Grinols v. Obama
On December 13, 2012, Taitz filed in the Sacramento, California lawsuit on behalf of James Grinols (a Republican voter from Minnesota), Robert Odden (a Libertarian voter from Minnesota), Keith Judd (federal detainee who was in West Virginia Democratic main vote), Edward Noonan (who won the presidential presidency of the American Independent Party in California), and Thomas MacLeran (who proposed to run for Republican presidency) tried to block Congress from certifying Electoral College elections. The lawsuit also seeks to prevent California officials from certifying the election results of the 2012 presidential election. On January 3, 2013, Morrison District Judge C. England Jr. refused the plaintiff's request for temporary restraining orders to prevent Congress from electoral College election certification. In April 2013, the court overturned the lawsuit. In November 2015, the 9th Circuit confirmed the dismissal of the district court.
Criminal case
The refusal to accept that Obama is a legitimate president has led to civil disobedience actions that have been criminally prosecuted. Walter Fitzpatrick_III_and_Darren_Huff Walter Fitzpatrick III and Darren Huff
Walter Fitzpatrick III did not succeed in persuading the head of Monroe County, Tennessee, the grand jury to sue Obama for treason because Obama was not eligible to serve as President. In response, in April 2010, Fitzpatrick accused the protester of violating the State law governing the length of time that a pawn could serve and attempt to arrest citizens. Fitzpatrick and Darren Huff of Georgia, who helped him, were sued by Tennessee for disrupting a jury meeting.
Later that month, Huff (armed with Colt. 45 and AK-47), Carl Swensson, and the others returned to Tennessee. Huff had informed the FBI investigator that he intended to assist Fitzpatrick in making arrests of citizens and demanded the State's allegations against Fitzpatrick be dropped. According to the FBI, Huff carries copies of an "arrest warrant", signed by Fitzpatrick, who accuses two dozen officials as "a domestic enemy of the United States engaged in treason". The federal prosecutor accused Huff of transporting firearms in continuation of civil disturbances, and using firearms in connection with violent crime.
Fitzpatrick was convicted in Tennessee for disrupting meetings and jailed for 60 days; Huff pleaded guilty to the same charges and avoided jail terms.
In the October 2011 federal hearing, witnesses testified that Huff said it would take over Madisonville, Tennessee, after the Monroe State jury there refused to indict Obama. On October 25, 2011, Huff was convicted of transporting firearms in the continuation of civil unrest. Huff was sentenced to four years in prison.
Terry Lakin
On 13 April 2010, the United States Army announced it would conduct military tribunal Lieutenant Colonel Terrence Lee Lakin, a doctor and osteopath at the Army Medical Corps, for refusing to report for deployment in Afghanistan. Lakin insists that Obama is not a US citizen, is not legally commander-in-chief and, therefore, has no authority to send him to Afghanistan. The military revoked Lakin's Pentagon license and seized a government-issued laptop computer. Lakin was assigned to the Walter Reed Army Medical Center pending trial.
The Lakin case is different from the case of Stefan Cook in Cook who volunteered to distribute, accept orders, and then filed a civil suit that refused to serve; the military retaliated by revoking Cook's voluntary orders. Lakin was ordered to deploy and he refused to obey orders, whereby the military finally initiated criminal prosecution under the Code of Military Justice Uniform. On 2 September 2010, Colonel Denise Lind, the presiding judge, issued a ruling in the case that Obama's status as a citizen of birth was irrelevant in a military court case against Lakin, since (1) his order did not come from Obama himself but more than a senior official with legal authority independents to issue them and (2) Obama's eligibility is outside the jurisdiction of the military and is within the jurisdiction of the United States Congress instead.
Three retired generals openly declared support for Lakin. The first is Major General of the Army (retired) Paul E. Vallely, a senior military analyst for Fox News. In an interview, Vallely stated "I think a lot in the military, and many of the military, questioned the natural birth status of Barack Obama." After Vallely's announcement, Major General of the Army (ret.) Jerry Curry and Air Force Lt. General (retired) Thomas G. McInerney also expressed public support for Lakin.
On December 7, 2010, Lakin filed a plea guilty on charges of disobeying his orders. On December 15, 2010, a military jury convicted him of allegations of lost movements based on design. He was sentenced to six months imprisonment and dismissed from service. During the voting phase of the trial, the prosecutor played a video posted on Lakin online where he challenged Obama's eligibility. Lakin tearfully replied that the video was a mistake and that he "would not do this again". On July 28, 2011, the United States Army Criminal Court of Appeals granted Lakin's request to withdraw his case from an appeal review.
In February 2012, the Kansas State Medical Treaty Council rejected Lakin's license for medical practice in the country for his actions. Council members noted that Lakin had endangered the health of soldiers in his unit by refusing to spread. There are also doubts about whether Lakin will obey the law on any health-related laws signed by Obama.
In January 2017, Lakin supporters apologized for his name from Donald Trump.
Theresa Cao
On January 6, 2011, the United States Constitution was read on the floor of the House of Representatives. When a section on presidential qualification is being read, Theresa Cao shouts from the gallery, "Except Obama, except Obama, please help us, Jesus." Cao was arrested for harassing Congress.
src: www.latimes.com
The indictment attempt using a "grand jury of a citizen"
Some campaigners, led by Carl Swensson, have been trying to "finally expose the conspiracy behind Obama's birth certificate" by forming what they call a "grand jury of citizens" to indict Obama. The "grand jury" is based on the Fifth Amendment premise that "no one should be answered for a capital, or a notorious crime, except at a Grand Jury presentation or charge". Although activists successfully handed out copies of "indictments" to congressional staff, the court did not consider "grand jury residents" to be profitable. In June 2009, a group of 172 campaigners declared themselves "Super Supreme Jurors of America" ​​and voted to accuse Obama of treason and accused him of not being a US citizen. Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia rejected the "indictment" on July 2 and declared: "[T] here there is no authority under the Rules of Procedure or in the law of the United States for this court to accept [presentations]... The persons who have made this presentation are not held by this court to sit as grand jury or they have been randomly selected from a fair section of this district.The charges or statements issued by the group have no power in under the Constitution or the laws of the United States. "
In 2013, a grand jury resident formed by Larry Klayman "punishes" Obama for fraud.
src: www.nydailynews.com
See also
- The conspiracy theory of Barack Obama's citizenship
- United States presidential eligibility law
- Original birth clause
src: citizenwells.files.wordpress.com
References
src: upload.wikimedia.org
External links
- List of cases of eligibility, by reference; documents 225 cases dismissed, rejected or resolved by supporting Obama's eligibility, 1 is delayed as of August 2015
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments